Friday, May 01, 2009

Another straw...

Via The Englishman, another tale of the death of British freedom.
On Thursday, Ferry was cleared of the witness intimidation charges, which had seen him locked up for four months, after the prosecution said it was offering no evidence on both counts.

You fucking what? Someone can be locked up for four months on a whim? Perhaps you would like to explain why?
Prosecutor Kerry Barker told Gloucester Crown Court: "I don't intend to explain in a public court why those instructing me took the decision they took.

"The reasons why are not a matter that is or should be in the public domain."

WHAT? The reasons absolutely should be in the public domain: your masters should be dragged down to the court and made to explain what the fucking hell they thought they were doing.

And then they should be charged with false imprisonment and we can watch, and record "in the public domain", as you stutter your way through some piss-poor explanations as to why "those instructing [you] took the decision they took" and why they should not be sent to jail themselves.

This just isn't funny anymore: if you want to remove someone's liberty, then you should be able to prove that there is a sound reason for doing so. If you have imprisoned someone and then decided that they shouldn't be imprisoned, then you should be made to explain yourself.

It is absolutely fucking vital that all aspects of the justice system are recorded openly, else we cannot know that justice has been done.


Tim W said...

What happened to a prima face case being given to the magistrates before you could be locked up for more than 24hrs?

Did they not notice there was no reason to do so, or did they just take a complaint at face value?

Can they be 'struck off' for this kind of shit?

The Bear At The Table said...

What do you expect when we live in a corrupt, moronic cesspit of apathy? The mental image of pitchfolks advancing should be sculpted in the minds of everyone of wastes of good air. Sadly for us, that isn't the case.

Anonymous said...

Almost surprising, except for the fact that this corrupt government have decided justice no longer exists, only the whim of some scribbler. Shame is too mild a word. When will someone stand up and do something about it!


Henry North London said...

Is this the hand of EU law again?

Twisted Root said...

In our part of the world (Warwickshire) a hunt follower was murdered by a 'hunt monitor' who drove his light aircraft propellor blade into him after he had come to the airfield to protest his activities. The 'hunt monitor', the local paper admitted, was trained and under the direction of the local police who used him to spot and report hunting from the air whilst indulging in his light aviation hobby.

The sheer nastiness and obsession, encouraged by our nascent Stasi, of the semi-official snitch squads enforcing what is at best a pretend law is worrying.

The Hunting Act has caused violent and malicious acts, provided a blueprint for fanatical enforcement squads and validated people's prejudices.

The government knew this would happen and I expect to see this replicated in many other areas in the coming years.

Chalcedon said...

Whatever happened to Habeas Corpus then? This stinks. Jailed for 4 months on remand and then no evidence offered? This is disgusting.

Swiss Tony said...

It could just be, and being a law student I might know what happened, but don't profess to stand up for the system, an offence gets committed, the scumbag gets locked up on what looks like pretty damning evidence, he goes infront of a court and bail is asked for (presume he did ask) and if the magistrates are convinced that he will pitch up for the hearing they will grant it.

So lets assume he couldn't show a previous record that only contained 10 crimes and a few spells in prison, because if thats all he had, he would be out. (And then listen to the public scream and complain that a scumbag is free to go and be a naughty boy again)

So the crime gets listed for a hearing, and part way through fresh evidence comes to light that shows he may not have committed the crime. And they let him go.

Would it be better if he was prosecuted for a crime that they now know he didn't do, or even found guilty and released in 10 years time?

It would be nice to have an explanation, but sometimes, public Immunity prevents any of us knowing the facts, to protect some greater good.

The Courts are separate from the government. They often stand up to the law, but the howls of outrage that crime is too soft, that it is too hard, blah blah are deafening.

The prosecution MUST reveal to the court any evidence they come across that will assist the accused. If the accused did a no comment interview, they don't know what will be useful to him. Maybe the fault lies with the accused all along?


RayD said...

Meanwhile, in the real world, he grassed up his mates and the CPS dropped the charges.

jgball said...

This was payback for invading the House of Commons, plain and simple. There should be an inquiry into this immediately as it is abuse of the law for political ends.
Had he been some junkie, the righteous would have had him out shoplifting or mugging within hours.
O/T, but check the news, more shit for Haringay Social Services.

Gareth said...

Henry North London,


Corpus Juris is replacing Habeas Corpus thanks to the interference of the EU, their many directives and pernicious Statutory Instruments from our own Government.

In March Judge Picton insisted the prosecution explain themselves. Today was their day of reckoning and they have refused. Shouldn't they have been found in contempt of court?

Anonymous said...

Ferry's going to stand trial for theft later on this year.

It's linked to the offence he was held on remand for four months for so that's probably why no reason was given, in case it prejudices the theft trial.

If you actually read the article and know a bit about law it's pretty straight forward, but instead scream on about a police state and the EU if you want to.