Does Mr Brunstrom want police to be judge and jjury too?
Discussion
www.north-wales.police.uk/nwp/public/en/blogs/viewblog.asp?UID=1&CID=44
Hi Folks this an extract from one of his latest Blogs on the NWPF site ....
Wednesday took me to London for a meeting of the ACPO Cabinet, of which I am no longer a member.(??) I was presenting a paper suggesting a way in which the police service could manage (and explain to the public in simple language!) our use of police discretion. Discretion is absolutely fundamental to policing in a common law democracy, but its use is r arely fully understood even within the service. My idea for a ‘continuum of disposal options’ (don’t worry, the Plain English version is on its way) was adopted and I now have a mandate to pursue with the government. In practice, if this comes to fruition, police will be able (amongst other options) to issue fixed penalty notices for all offences with a huge saving in time and effort for all concerned. I will return to this idea in a future Blog - the impact is likely to be significant for all citizens.
Hi Folks this an extract from one of his latest Blogs on the NWPF site ....
Wednesday took me to London for a meeting of the ACPO Cabinet, of which I am no longer a member.(??) I was presenting a paper suggesting a way in which the police service could manage (and explain to the public in simple language!) our use of police discretion. Discretion is absolutely fundamental to policing in a common law democracy, but its use is r arely fully understood even within the service. My idea for a ‘continuum of disposal options’ (don’t worry, the Plain English version is on its way) was adopted and I now have a mandate to pursue with the government. In practice, if this comes to fruition, police will be able (amongst other options) to issue fixed penalty notices for all offences with a huge saving in time and effort for all concerned. I will return to this idea in a future Blog - the impact is likely to be significant for all citizens.
Jeeez. Fixed penalty notices for ALL offences?
The blog seems a bit hazy on detail, Herr Brunstrom needs to explain exactly what type(s) of offence he's about to attack in his move to establish a fully fledged police state. What starts out as a nice cuddly heartwarming floating of the police discretion thing turns into a fascist snatch and grab raid on natural justice.
Next blog entry: Brunstrom plans to abolish all types of Court, save money, and to carry Tafia's thread title, appoint himself as judge and jury on everything.
Dangerous man.
The blog seems a bit hazy on detail, Herr Brunstrom needs to explain exactly what type(s) of offence he's about to attack in his move to establish a fully fledged police state. What starts out as a nice cuddly heartwarming floating of the police discretion thing turns into a fascist snatch and grab raid on natural justice.
Next blog entry: Brunstrom plans to abolish all types of Court, save money, and to carry Tafia's thread title, appoint himself as judge and jury on everything.
Dangerous man.
martind said:
vonhosen said:
Where's the bit about Police being judge & jury ?
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Only if you can afford the £4000 prosecution costs if you fail to prove your innocence
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
vonhosen said:
martind said:
vonhosen said:
Where's the bit about Police being judge & jury ?
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Only if you can afford the £4000 prosecution costs if you fail to prove your innocence
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
Sounds sensible, but how can this be implemented?
If I went to court and said I will not claim any costs, just want to see justice done, would the court then waive any costs against me?
s2art said:
vonhosen said:
martind said:
vonhosen said:
Where's the bit about Police being judge & jury ?
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Only if you can afford the £4000 prosecution costs if you fail to prove your innocence
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
Sounds sensible, but how can this be implemented?
If I went to court and said I will not claim any costs, just want to see justice done, would the court then waive any costs against me?
Why not.
Submit your costs in a sealed envelope before the trial to be opened at the conclusion.
vonhosen said:
s2art said:
vonhosen said:
martind said:
vonhosen said:
Where's the bit about Police being judge & jury ?
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Under the FPN system you can have your day in court
Only if you can afford the £4000 prosecution costs if you fail to prove your innocence
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
Sounds sensible, but how can this be implemented?
If I went to court and said I will not claim any costs, just want to see justice done, would the court then waive any costs against me?
Why not.
Submit your costs in a sealed envelope before the trial to be opened at the conclusion.
That's easy then. After all, most people in court protesting their innocence are really just after an acquittal. Therefore write £0.00 on the piece of paper, if you win you get an acquittal, if you lose you don't have to pay for the winker who's been flown over from the US to dazzle the court with his knowledge
vonhosen said:
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
The fundamental problem with this is that whilst the defendant is risking his own money, the authorities are, as always, risking someone else's. What are the chances that a Constable would authorise the expenditure for using both an aeroplane and then a helicopter to film the path of the infamous and much-feared apple-eater if he knew that, should the defendent be acquitted, the Constable's own after-tax wages would be garnished?
It's not exactly a level pitch.
flemke said:
vonhosen said:
Why not.
Submit your costs in a sealed envelope before the trial to be opened at the conclusion.
Stupid question here: Submit your costs in a sealed envelope before the trial to be opened at the conclusion.
How can you know what your costs will be before the trial is finished?
Of course you can't that's the problem.
At present the prosecution make a token claim for costs though, it's nothing like the real cost of the prosecution. They know what that claim will be before the trial starts, you could do the same.
Budget your defence & submit the cost, that will be all the prosecution could then claim from you in such a system.
flemke said:
vonhosen said:
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
The fundamental problem with this is that whilst the defendant is risking his own money, the authorities are, as always, risking someone else's. What are the chances that a Constable would authorise the expenditure for using both an aeroplane and then a helicopter to film the path of the infamous and much-feared apple-eater if he knew that, should the defendent be acquitted, the Constable's own after-tax wages would be garnished?
It's not exactly a level pitch.
But you control the amount they can claim towards that cost recovery, by the amount you would claim for your defence.
It seemed to be what the article that started all this off was saying in some way, was that the CPS should be making a claim for costs similar to the sort of costs that acquitted defendants claim, rather than just going for the standard token £50 or whatever.
Really what costs the CPS ask for is a bit mute, because the decision over what will be allowed is the courts decision. To allow much larger costs claims against convicted persons would really require intervention from the government towards the courts proceedures for assessing what costs should be awarded. The Police certainly won't be able to unilaterally demand a huge increase in cost awards.
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 16th September 15:07
vh said:
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
An amateur defending himself, in his own time is never going to rack up anywhere near the same costs as the police/CPS/Courts services with all their attendant time wasting inefficiency pursuing a prosecution which is frequently not in the public interest.
Richard C said:
vh said:
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
An amateur defending himself, in his own time is never going to rack up anywhere near the same costs as the police/CPS/Courts services with all their attendant time wasting inefficiency pursuing a prosecution which is frequently not in the public interest.
So the CPS shouldn't be able to claim a huge amount of costs from the amateur defending himself, because he wouldn't be claiming a lot from them should he get acquitted.
vonhosen said:
Richard C said:
vh said:
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
An amateur defending himself, in his own time is never going to rack up anywhere near the same costs as the police/CPS/Courts services with all their attendant time wasting inefficiency pursuing a prosecution which is frequently not in the public interest.
So the CPS shouldn't be able to claim a huge amount of costs from the amateur defending himself, because he wouldn't be claiming a lot from them should he get acquitted.
That was your suggestion, remember the sealed envelope
???mondeohdear said:
vonhosen said:
Richard C said:
vh said:
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
An amateur defending himself, in his own time is never going to rack up anywhere near the same costs as the police/CPS/Courts services with all their attendant time wasting inefficiency pursuing a prosecution which is frequently not in the public interest.
So the CPS shouldn't be able to claim a huge amount of costs from the amateur defending himself, because he wouldn't be claiming a lot from them should he get acquitted.
That was your suggestion, remember the sealed envelope
???That's what I'm saying. The amateur defending himslef is only going to have a small claim in the envelope. If he is convicted then the CPS would only be able to claim the amount he had submitted.
vonhosen said:
mondeohdear said:
vonhosen said:
Richard C said:
vh said:
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.
An amateur defending himself, in his own time is never going to rack up anywhere near the same costs as the police/CPS/Courts services with all their attendant time wasting inefficiency pursuing a prosecution which is frequently not in the public interest.
So the CPS shouldn't be able to claim a huge amount of costs from the amateur defending himself, because he wouldn't be claiming a lot from them should he get acquitted.
That was your suggestion, remember the sealed envelope
???That's what I'm saying. The amateur defending himslef is only going to have a small claim in the envelope. If he is convicted then the CPS would only be able to claim the amount he had submitted.
Are you agreeing then that the £4,000 costs were excessive when all the bloke was trying to do was get acquitted then??
[quote=vonhosen
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.[/quote]
Absolutely not. The "court" is the one making the accusation. It is totally inappropraite to claim the cost of prosecuting from the defendant.
I happen to think personally that the costs that the court can claim from you, should be similar to the costs that you can claim from the court.[/quote]
Absolutely not. The "court" is the one making the accusation. It is totally inappropraite to claim the cost of prosecuting from the defendant.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff