Yet another example of criminal justice

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by 661-Pete »

Also on BBC news:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-31989287
Totally disgusting. This puts into question the whole jury trial system: surely such cases should no longer be tried before a jury. I only hope the CPS find some way to appeal against this.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Yet another example of criminal injustice

Post by gaz »

CPS information.
Can the prosecutor appeal if a person is acquitted (found not guilty)?

There is no general right of appeal if a person is acquitted. The general rule was that once a person had been found not guilty of an offence, he could not be tried a second time, (this is known as the "rule against double jeopardy"). However, the law has been reformed to permit a retrial in cases of some very serious offences where there has been an acquittal in court, but compelling new evidence has subsequently come to light which indicates that an acquitted person was in fact guilty. Examples of new evidence might include DNA or fingerprint tests, or new witnesses to the offence coming forward. The main offences to which this applies are murder and other serious violent and sexual offences. It is for the Director of Public Prosecutions to decide if the prosecution should ask for a second trial.


In this case "Not guilty" is the end of the criminal process.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by 661-Pete »

Looking at some of the comments on road.cc .... understandable but scary!
"time to deal with things your self cos the law wont"

"Vigilante justice is the only way?"

"I really do hope the jury loose (sic) someone to a texting driver."

"Do we know the drivers address? More ways of achieving justice than through courts."

etc. etc. :shock:

I must stress that I'm not registered on road.cc, but even if I were, I'd think twice before entering into that sort of 'discussion'. But I do feel, as I said before, that in this 800th anniversary year of Magna Carta, the entire jury system has run its course and ought to be done away with, full stop.

I sat on a jury just once, 25 years ago, that was before the days of saturation internet, but even then I felt, with hindsight, that the verdict we arrived at (on a relatively minor case) was flawed. Nowadays, how can any member of the public picked out at random be assured of being totally impartial?

We elect MPs and other political representatives and then expect them to 'get on with the job' without constantly referring back to teams of twelve members of the public pulled in off the street. Yes I know they get it wrong sometimes, some of them are corrupt, yes the party you don't like gets elected to office. But on the whole this is how democracy works. And most of the time it does work. Why not the same for our legal process? There are no juries in the Appeal court and we accept its judgements.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by thirdcrank »

There is nothing in the following I have not posted before:

To prove a charge of careless driving, the prosecution must show that the driving fell below what is normally OK.

A person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if (and only if) the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/3ZA

Dangerous driving "is far" below that standard.

... a person is to be regarded as driving dangerously if (and, subject to subsection (2) below, only if)—
(a) the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and
(b)it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/2A

This verdict simply shows how low are the standards expected of drivers in England and Wales. A verdict like this has no formal effect on future prosecutions ie it sets no binding precedents but it will surely influence future investigations and decisions to prosecute. (And probably whether or not anybody bothers to submit a file to the CPS for consideration.) The inevitably wide publicity this will receive will also strengthen the belief that "they can't touch you for it."

I'll not waste time by dwelling yet again on how we reached this deplorable situation.
User avatar
ArMoRothair
Posts: 351
Joined: 20 Jun 2013, 10:55am
Location: Londinium

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by ArMoRothair »

You have to read Bez's analysis of the case.

https://beyondthekerb.wordpress.com/201 ... ight-here/
tyreon
Posts: 936
Joined: 4 Oct 2012, 4:39pm

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by tyreon »

661 Pete.I might be repeating myself. If I am,apologies. I read that so slow is the criminal justice system in Italy,and so 'variable' the decisions,that justice is often seen as 'denied'. Without faith in the judicial system some people have taken to resolving matters through the Camorra. I guess you go to the head honcho,put in your claim and 'the boss' sorts it out. Only later are you expected to 'pay-the-bill'. Legal costs,length of time to achieve equitable resolution,questionable court outcomes...can make the Comorra appear quite attractive to some.

Forgive the cynicism: British Justice: Black boy buys looted pair of trainers from Tottenham riots = 6 months in the slammer. White high-flyer chief executive in some banking biz,millions missin or improperly sold = no prosecution,maybe some fake contrition,a weak aplogy,then back to job with bonus+++.

The good ol' days: Smash up the restaurant or the town,urinate and wot-not. Good background,public schoolboy? That's high-jinks. For the council house kid,that meant Borstal and a criminal record that wrecked his life.
Tonyf33
Posts: 3926
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 3:31pm
Location: Letchworth N.Herts

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by Tonyf33 »

Surely by definition if you kill (or SI) someone whilst driving your standard of driving IS far below that of everyone else, or are we accepting that all the other drivers that encountered X cyclist (or whomever is killed) on that given day are advanced drivers far above, in which case that means they are still below the norm. If that low level IS the 'accepted' norm why aren't all the other drivers killing and maiming? :twisted:
Last edited by Tonyf33 on 21 Mar 2015, 6:33pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Yet another example of criminal injustice

Post by gaz »

CPS
Factors that are not relevant in deciding whether an act is dangerous or careless

The following factors are not relevant when deciding whether an act of driving is dangerous or careless:
the injury or death of one or more persons involved in a road traffic collision. Importantly, injury or death does not, by itself, turn a collision into careless driving or turn careless driving into dangerous driving. Multiple deaths are however an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes (Sentencing Guidelines Council: Causing Death by Driving Guideline, page 5, paragraph 19);

...


In short: Safe, competent drivers may still be involved in fatal collisions.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by thirdcrank »

To me, it's self-evident that careless /dangerous driving is defined by the driving itself, rather than the result of the driving. Having said that, it's the result of the driving, rather than the driving itself that generally decides whether a crash leads to an investigation and occasionally a prosecution. Crash into a tree and there may be no official action of any kind unless you or a passenger is killed or seriously injured. Just about everybody, including jurors, knows that. It's hardly surprising that they feel that defendants in "causing death" cases are being picked on only because there has been a death.

This situation was not reached overnight or for a single reason, but IMO, the CPS has a lot to answer for here.

In the meantime, everybody involved except the bereaved can sleep easily, knowing that this was a jury verdict.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by 661-Pete »

thirdcrank wrote:To me, it's self-evident that careless /dangerous driving is defined by the driving itself, rather than the result of the driving. Having said that, it's the result of the driving, rather than the driving itself that generally decides whether a crash leads to an investigation and occasionally a prosecution. Crash into a tree and there may be no official action of any kind unless you or a passenger is killed or seriously injured. Just about everybody, including jurors, knows that. It's hardly surprising that they feel that defendants in "causing death" cases are being picked on only because there has been a death.

This situation was not reached overnight or for a single reason, but IMO, the CPS has a lot to answer for here.

In the meantime, everybody involved except the bereaved can sleep easily, knowing that this was a jury verdict.

Surely it has always been the case that the more severe the consequences of a crime are, the more serious the charges brought against the defendant. If you point a gun at someone, fire and miss, you can be charged and convicted of attempted murder, nothing more. If however you hit and kill your victim, the charge will be murder which carries a far more severe penalty. There is no difference in your behaviour or your criminal intentions, simply a quirk of fate that decided whether your victim survived or not.

Likewise with driving offences. If someone texts while driving and is caught, but without having any accident, the most that's likely to happen is penalty points. But if they cause a fatal accident, society understandably judges them far more harshly. So should the courts. Or should they? Is this justice?

Having said that, could you explain why you single out the CPS for criticism here?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by thirdcrank »

661-Pete wrote:
thirdcrank wrote: ... Having said that, could you explain why you single out the CPS for criticism here?


It's something I'm sure I've explained in much more detail before, but there was a time when if there was a crash which the police got to know about, it was almost certain that somebody would be prosecuted for due care. Then, the CPS decided that wasn't appropriate. And, as I tried to explain in the post you quote, it has now become the exception for anybody to be prosecuted after a crash. The main exceptions are when somebody is killed. It's becoming increasingly easy to blame the victim.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by 661-Pete »

Yes - I see that all right. But of course it doesn't explain how the guy referred to in this thread, who was prosecuted, got acquitted, after a full trial before a jury. Unless the CPS were negligent in not presenting enough evidence?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by [XAP]Bob »

The cps have failed over a number of years, to the point where death is now considered "unlucky" rather than the result of decisions.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Yet another example of criminal justice

Post by thirdcrank »

661-Pete wrote:Yes - I see that all right. But of course it doesn't explain how the guy referred to in this thread, who was prosecuted, got acquitted, after a full trial before a jury. Unless the CPS were negligent in not presenting enough evidence?


I don't think that that follows. I'm saying that there's a question of norms. eg Driving and texting is now accepted by many people as the norm, even though it can objectively be shown to be dangerous, in much the same way as drink driving. The big difference is that with drink driving, the objectivity in terms of evidence is provided by testing and scientific analysis. With an allegation of "bad driving," no matter how good the evidence or the advocate presenting it, if the jury believes the driving was OK, that's the end of it. I'm blaming the CPS for having led the way when the investigation of the majority of crashes was abandoned. I'm completely out of touch now, of course, but it's my impression that recently the CPS has tried quite hard to retrieve the situation, at least in KSI prosecutions, but as I've suggested on the current Michael Mason thread, we're past the point of no return.
Post Reply