Nick Freeman strikes again
Discussion
FishFace said:
Fortunately he doesn't get all drink drivers off, although he sadly succeeded in getting a Police Inspector off in a drink-driving case.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5279672.stm
He also highlights how
ing stupid Magistrates' can be. The Ronnie O'Sullivan case was a prime example of this on two occasions. The infamous "do you think I'm gay?" line, and the fact they accepted that O'Sullivan was too depressed to provide a urine sample when he was drink-driving. Yes, you read that correctly.
If everyone down the line did their jobs properly he wouldnt be able to get anyone off...http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5279672.stm
He also highlights how
ing stupid Magistrates' can be. The Ronnie O'Sullivan case was a prime example of this on two occasions. The infamous "do you think I'm gay?" line, and the fact they accepted that O'Sullivan was too depressed to provide a urine sample when he was drink-driving. Yes, you read that correctly. 
I like Clarkson but strewth, that's not a tiny slipup.
FishFace said:
There is a necessity for people like Freeman as having a solid CJS relies on having excellent defences.
Just to correct he hasn't got anybody "off" the CPS fail to prove guilty. A quient concept in today's world of automated prosecution but an important one.
Based on what's in the article the true scandal is the that the it shows how automated the whole process is.
SCP to Alfa = NIP
Alfa to SCP = Clarkson
SCP to CPS = Clarkson
CPS to court = Clarkson
Possible that SCP sent NIP to Clarkson who presumbly claimed he had no knowledge. Either way SCP failed again to both with collecting any real evidence. Reallying as usual in slinging people in front of court in the hope they will pay - sloppy justice.
For the offence of speeding detected by camera then to get information as to who the driver was the authorities have to rely on Section 172 Road Traffic Act 1988 which states:
Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence—
2(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police.
In the case of a Hired or loan car then the Reg keeper complies and discharges his liability by naming the next person down the line i.e. Clarkson as the person in charge of the vehicle but not necesssarily the driver , or uses the defence under the Section:
A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(a) above is guilty of an offence unless he shows to the satisfaction of the court that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was.
Having obtained from the Keeper of the vehicle the information that Clarkson had the vehicle, but no information that he had been the driver, a further sub section of 172 is used:
2(b) any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.
A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(b) above is guilty of an offence.
It will be noted that the defence under 2(a) is not repeated in a 2 (b) request so it would appear one cannot rely on did not know/could not ascertain who the driver was.
Whilst not being privy to full report of Freemans defence, must have been the (2)(a) defence which does not apply to 2(b) offence and in usual style has bamboozled the bench.
He came to our local Court some time ago and defended a female on drink drive and got her off on an alleged procedural technicallity. Resulting from that, I heard, an internal enquiry was held, higher legal advice sought and police procedure found not wanting.
Bearing in mind that it is the legal profession (CPS) that have checked the evidence and authorised prosecution then what he does is show up the poor quality of his profession or is it boys looking after boys (TinC)
Sad that hard cash, often beyond the means on normal men, can affect the Justice system.
dvd
Blue Polar bear:
You missed one:
SCP to Alfa = NIP
Alfa to SCP = Clarkson
SCP to CLARKSON - ( Signed reply- needed to invoke S 12 RT Offenders Act 1988.)
SCP to CPS
CPS to Court.
Just read a bit more on the SKy news site. Case never got off the ground CPS pulled out before it kicked off. Trouble with forms it looks like - your missing bit?. CPS (Legal) cock up - what is new?
Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence—
2(a) the person keeping the vehicle shall give such information as to the identity of the driver as he may be required to give by or on behalf of a chief officer of police.
In the case of a Hired or loan car then the Reg keeper complies and discharges his liability by naming the next person down the line i.e. Clarkson as the person in charge of the vehicle but not necesssarily the driver , or uses the defence under the Section:
A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(a) above is guilty of an offence unless he shows to the satisfaction of the court that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained who the driver of the vehicle was.
Having obtained from the Keeper of the vehicle the information that Clarkson had the vehicle, but no information that he had been the driver, a further sub section of 172 is used:
2(b) any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.
A person who fails to comply with the requirement of subsection (2)(b) above is guilty of an offence.
It will be noted that the defence under 2(a) is not repeated in a 2 (b) request so it would appear one cannot rely on did not know/could not ascertain who the driver was.
Whilst not being privy to full report of Freemans defence, must have been the (2)(a) defence which does not apply to 2(b) offence and in usual style has bamboozled the bench.
He came to our local Court some time ago and defended a female on drink drive and got her off on an alleged procedural technicallity. Resulting from that, I heard, an internal enquiry was held, higher legal advice sought and police procedure found not wanting.
Bearing in mind that it is the legal profession (CPS) that have checked the evidence and authorised prosecution then what he does is show up the poor quality of his profession or is it boys looking after boys (TinC)
Sad that hard cash, often beyond the means on normal men, can affect the Justice system.
dvd
Blue Polar bear:
You missed one:
SCP to Alfa = NIP
Alfa to SCP = Clarkson
SCP to CLARKSON - ( Signed reply- needed to invoke S 12 RT Offenders Act 1988.)
SCP to CPS
CPS to Court.
Just read a bit more on the SKy news site. Case never got off the ground CPS pulled out before it kicked off. Trouble with forms it looks like - your missing bit?. CPS (Legal) cock up - what is new?
Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Friday 7th September 08:50
What a lot of people and the police seem to forget is the guiding principle of innocent until PROVEN guilty.
If procedure isn't followed, then you are stuffed. Nick Freeman should be seen as a wake up call. I know he's public enemy No.1 to the police and CPS, but all he's doing is his job. If there weren't holes, he wouldn't be half as sucessful.
But there are and that is shoddy justice for the rest of us who don't have Nick Freeman to defend us. How many people have just blindly accepted an "offer" when in reality they would have had no need.
That isn't justice, that's just revenue raising.
If procedure isn't followed, then you are stuffed. Nick Freeman should be seen as a wake up call. I know he's public enemy No.1 to the police and CPS, but all he's doing is his job. If there weren't holes, he wouldn't be half as sucessful.
But there are and that is shoddy justice for the rest of us who don't have Nick Freeman to defend us. How many people have just blindly accepted an "offer" when in reality they would have had no need.
That isn't justice, that's just revenue raising.
IforB said:
What a lot of people and the police seem to forget is the guiding principle of innocent until PROVEN guilty.
If procedure isn't followed, then you are stuffed. Nick Freeman should be seen as a wake up call. I know he's public enemy No.1 to the police and CPS, but all he's doing is his job. If there weren't holes, he wouldn't be half as sucessful.
But there are and that is shoddy justice for the rest of us who don't have Nick Freeman to defend us. How many people have just blindly accepted an "offer" when in reality they would have had no need.
That isn't justice, that's just revenue raising.
Except he also get drink drivers off with his skills, dangerous drivers as well. So he is no hero of the people.If procedure isn't followed, then you are stuffed. Nick Freeman should be seen as a wake up call. I know he's public enemy No.1 to the police and CPS, but all he's doing is his job. If there weren't holes, he wouldn't be half as sucessful.
But there are and that is shoddy justice for the rest of us who don't have Nick Freeman to defend us. How many people have just blindly accepted an "offer" when in reality they would have had no need.
That isn't justice, that's just revenue raising.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff