ChatterBank3 mins ago
David Davis
The issue on which David Davis stood is laudable � the 42 day detention proposal.
However, yesterday a defendant stood accused of the horrific murder of two French students in South London. He appeared before magistrates and was remanded in custody. He will not now appear before a court until October (more than 90 days hence) and it will be a good deal longer (probably up to a year) before he stands trial.
This man has been arrested and charged. He has been put before three lay magistrates who have been told by the CPS, "We think he committed a murder". No evidence was presented (or will be until his trial). He will not be interviewed any further. He will spend a year in prison before being tried. There is scarcely any significant difference (certainly not as far as he is concerned) between this and being detained on suspicion without charge.
Why are Mr Davies and his fellow MPs not jumping up and down and perhaps resigning about this scandalous state of affairs, which goes on regularly? The protection of civil liberties is an admirable aim, but should it not extend to everybody, not just suspected terrorists?
However, yesterday a defendant stood accused of the horrific murder of two French students in South London. He appeared before magistrates and was remanded in custody. He will not now appear before a court until October (more than 90 days hence) and it will be a good deal longer (probably up to a year) before he stands trial.
This man has been arrested and charged. He has been put before three lay magistrates who have been told by the CPS, "We think he committed a murder". No evidence was presented (or will be until his trial). He will not be interviewed any further. He will spend a year in prison before being tried. There is scarcely any significant difference (certainly not as far as he is concerned) between this and being detained on suspicion without charge.
Why are Mr Davies and his fellow MPs not jumping up and down and perhaps resigning about this scandalous state of affairs, which goes on regularly? The protection of civil liberties is an admirable aim, but should it not extend to everybody, not just suspected terrorists?
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by New Judge. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The difference being that the Police have investigated someone they have charged, found evidence and believe that there is a case to answer which will be brought to court via the CPS.
The other proposal involves the Police lifting someone and saying ' oh we'll hold you for 42 days because we reckon you MIGHT have done something, we don't like the company you keep but we frankly don't have a shred of good old fashioned hard evidence, and certainly not enough to charge you, we just have a 'feeling'.
See the difference?
The other proposal involves the Police lifting someone and saying ' oh we'll hold you for 42 days because we reckon you MIGHT have done something, we don't like the company you keep but we frankly don't have a shred of good old fashioned hard evidence, and certainly not enough to charge you, we just have a 'feeling'.
See the difference?
Who knows whether they have found evidence, obNOXious? Certainly not the people who have authorised the imprisonment (or remand, call it what you will).
In the ideal world, Ethel I would like to see suspects tried a lot quicker than they are now. A year (which is about the time it takes many serious crimes to come to trial) is an excessively long time to hold somebody who may, just may, be innocent. I believe a statutory maximum of about three months should be imposed and if the prosecution cannot get its act together by then (and after all, the evidence is already alleged to have been found) then the suspect walks.
It is probably unfair of me to draw a parallel between the two scenarios and I did pose the question more of an �Aunt Sally� than anything else. Nonetheless, we seem quite happy to keep somebody incarcerated for a long time because the police (so they say) have found evidence, but not so happy to keep them locked up whilst they go and find it.
There is no difference as far as the individual involved is concerned. He has been locked up without a trial. The nicety of having been charged does not make his detention any more tolerable.
In the ideal world, Ethel I would like to see suspects tried a lot quicker than they are now. A year (which is about the time it takes many serious crimes to come to trial) is an excessively long time to hold somebody who may, just may, be innocent. I believe a statutory maximum of about three months should be imposed and if the prosecution cannot get its act together by then (and after all, the evidence is already alleged to have been found) then the suspect walks.
It is probably unfair of me to draw a parallel between the two scenarios and I did pose the question more of an �Aunt Sally� than anything else. Nonetheless, we seem quite happy to keep somebody incarcerated for a long time because the police (so they say) have found evidence, but not so happy to keep them locked up whilst they go and find it.
There is no difference as far as the individual involved is concerned. He has been locked up without a trial. The nicety of having been charged does not make his detention any more tolerable.
-- answer removed --
I'm not suggesting he be let out, tetjam, I'm simply suggesting that he is afforded a fair trial within a reasonable time after the alleged offence.
At the moment there are large numbers of unconvicted people remanded in custody for unreasonably long periods of time. An MP has chosen to resign over the issue of people being kept for 42 days withourt charge, but nobody seems concerned that we keep people locked up for a year without trial.
At the moment there are large numbers of unconvicted people remanded in custody for unreasonably long periods of time. An MP has chosen to resign over the issue of people being kept for 42 days withourt charge, but nobody seems concerned that we keep people locked up for a year without trial.
-- answer removed --
I am not the world's biggest fan of the police ( I thought 'message in a bottle' was sh1te:) but if they found no evidence at all then the CPS will have very little hope in hell of getting a conviction and this will collapse before it ever gets to court. Of course there are miscarriages of justice, there always have been and there always will be unfortunatly, but I'm damned if actually I don't think the UK has a pretty good judicial system overall, albeit grindingly slow sometimes.
You can't try someone for murder in a few weeks, mainly because it's unfair to the defence rather than the prosecution, but I agree the less time ALL prisoners are kept on remand the better so long as the rule of fairness and law is served, but really New judge, what else would you have them do with him, if not remand him, he's not exactly been accused of a minor crime has he?
You can't try someone for murder in a few weeks, mainly because it's unfair to the defence rather than the prosecution, but I agree the less time ALL prisoners are kept on remand the better so long as the rule of fairness and law is served, but really New judge, what else would you have them do with him, if not remand him, he's not exactly been accused of a minor crime has he?
Its all political game s
Here in spain they can detain you without charge indefinitely
the madrid train bombings were far worse tahn 7/7
the spanish will take no sh1t now
britain is so far up its own pc arse and dont blame europe or the eu
spain is in the eu
i say fuk em.
if theyre innocen t then pay em off
if it saves a massacre then im all for it
bring in id cards
and sod the libertarians
time for actions not words
Here in spain they can detain you without charge indefinitely
the madrid train bombings were far worse tahn 7/7
the spanish will take no sh1t now
britain is so far up its own pc arse and dont blame europe or the eu
spain is in the eu
i say fuk em.
if theyre innocen t then pay em off
if it saves a massacre then im all for it
bring in id cards
and sod the libertarians
time for actions not words
Derek Bentley was dealt with in even less time. Miscarriages of justice can be so quick.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bentley
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bentley
I'm with you New Judge.
For example, why did it take 9 months before this went to court....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/750002 3.stm
... an open and shut case if there ever was one.
For example, why did it take 9 months before this went to court....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/750002 3.stm
... an open and shut case if there ever was one.
1 to 18 of 18
