RE: Are scamera bodies legal?
Discussion
jensen-healey said:
"Safety Camera Partnerships are comprised of representatives from local authorities, the police, the Highways Agency and the magistrates courts and optional representatives from the Crown Prosecution Service, national health service trusts and the health authority.
Safety Camera Partnerships are not however a legal entity, and they complement, not replace, existing local authority and police statutory responsibilities in respect of road safety. Safety Camera Partnerships are not therefore directly accountable to any elected bodies. However each member of the partnership does remain locally accountable to its parent body."
I see the basis for a challenge here. Under article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights you are entitled to a fair trail. This includes the right to an unbiased tribunal and one that is deonstrably unbiased. If representatives of the Mags courts are part of the partnership how can there demonstrably be a fair trtial; the court is part of the partnersip that took your photo and nicked you, even if done by the agency of the police partner?
It is fo rhtis reason that the Lord Chancellor has stepped down as head of the judiciary. He was also a cabinet minister adn thus too closely linked the government with the courts/judiciary. Seems to me everyon ewho has ever been caught by a "safety camera" - even if they paid up as a challenge. They never had a right to a fair trtial and thus should not be penalised.
Wo will take this up. Of course there maybe partnerships that do not include the Mags, I am just going by what Ladyman said.
Its a point I intend to raise if I get that far...
However I understand that the mags would probably be classed as independant - its just that the clerk may well not be as he is employed by the Magistrates comission - part of the pratnership
As I understand it
Sean
The clerk is the advisor to the Mags and there to see that they behave themselves. The individual magistrates may be independant but they are part of a system which is tied into the prosecution. The point is not whether the mags will be fair. I am sure that in the vast majority of cases they will. They are part of a system which has the court and the prosecutor in bed together asa money making activity. Good luck, I don't pretend it will be an easy point. My view is that hte magistrates courts should not be party to any law enforcement activity, other than the hearing of cases prepared by a prosecution independant of the magistrates. Justice has to be seen to be done ,as well as done.
mybrainhurts said:
"Safety Camera Partnerships are not ... a legal entity" and "are not ... directly accountable to any elected bodies".
I'd be interested to see what the words blanked by the ... are. Selective quoting? Spin? Of course Safespeed would never do that. Or would they?
Your hostility to Paul's work wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that you attended the Robert Gordon University, refuge of the good 'Professor' David Begg, all round good egg and hater of all things automotive. Or would it?
It's not hostility, i merely don't want to get swept along with any hero worship that might be going on. Safespeed do a great job but we need to be aware that paul will, and is entitled to, use spin and wordplay to his advantage just as the enemy do.
If i was a supporter of Begg, do you really think i'd be on PH in an non-trolling capacity? And i'd hardly call it a refuge, they all think he's as much of a nutter as we do.
agent006 said:
It's not hostility, i merely don't want to get swept along with any hero worship that might be going on. Safespeed do a great job but we need to be aware that paul will, and is entitled to, use spin and wordplay to his advantage just as the enemy do.
I spin constantly. I exploit weaknesses in the other side's case. I try to make the most of our strengths. But I'll NEVER lie, misrepresent or mislead. Apart for any other consideration, it simply isn't necessary - we can win every argument with the true facts - so we can always keep the moral high ground.
agent006 said:
"Safety Camera Partnerships are not ... a legal entity" and "are not ... directly accountable to any elected bodies".
I'd be interested to see what the words blanked by the ... are. Selective quoting? Spin? Of course Safespeed would never do that. Or would they?
Your hostility to Paul's work wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that you attended the Robert Gordon University, refuge of the good 'Professor' David Begg, all round good egg and hater of all things automotive. Or would it?
It's not hostility, i merely don't want to get swept along with any hero worship that might be going on. Safespeed do a great job but we need to be aware that paul will, and is entitled to, use spin and wordplay to his advantage just as the enemy do.
If i was a supporter of Begg, do you really think i'd be on PH in an non-trolling capacity? And i'd hardly call it a refuge, they all think he's as much of a nutter as we do.
Only jesting.
Your last comment made my decade.....thanks for that!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff