Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

muggle

No Charges Over G20 Man's Death

Recommended Posts

Why - I though BT made arguably valid points... with which do you disagree?

I disagree with his pompous tone. I need the practise because tomorrow morning I am in court taking on another pompous pr.ick in the form of a police officer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Does anyone here have relevant legal background to suggest a credible legal reason for the lack of charges?"

Wow, so it's twelve years ago or so it seems.

This poor soul had been caught by the Police wandering around Clapham Common with his **** hanging out,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Davies_(Welsh_politician)#.22Moment_of_Madness.22_and_after

I think he's the one but they begin to blur after all this time.

Anyway back then I was appearing regularly as a defence brief at Camberwell Green Magistrates Court, before whom this poor soul was hauled for his indiscretion.

I didn't see this. I suppose one never does. One always hears it from other people.

But respected lawyers, good guys that I worked with and saw in Court everyday said it was like a scene from "Men in Black" or something except they wore grey suits.

They appeared, in grey. They remained aloof, visible but not so visible that you'd see them if you didn't know they were out of place.

When Davies' case was called they occupied the prosecution benches. There were two of them. One took the fore bench, the second the hind.

When the Magistrate asked what was happening today the leader, on the fore bench, explained the case had been reviewed and there was insufficient evidence to offer a realistic prospect of conviction and so it was withdrawn.

And so it was.

The men in grey, shut their briefcases and walked out with neither a word nor glance to the left nor right. They were gone back to who knows where they had come from.

Apparently Davies collected his stuff about him and shuffled off in their wake.

The establishment's penchant for looking after its own seems to have had its boundaries pushed back to places undreamt of in 1998.

Why?

I can only think the establishment must feel it may really need the riot squad in the not too distant ......

As for a legal justification not to charge, if there is an icicle in Hades it has that legal reason carved into it,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggshell_skull

The only people seized with a genuine or legal competence to decide such questions as are out there are a jury.

If the copper stood before them and the jury came up with a not guilty verdict (and I'd back some of the defence teams I used to know to be able to pull that one off on a good day) fair enough, no complaints.

As it stands, it stinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with his pompous tone. I need the practise because tomorrow morning I am in court taking on another pompous pr.ick in the form of a police officer.

Interesting point... I always find tone on interweb posts dificile - I'm perhaps prone to misinterpretation or attributing seriousness or insult when none was (probably) intended. I didn't read pompousness into BT's post at all... hmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the victim of this assault had pushed a policeman over, and the PC died as a result, would he have got away with it? Not likely!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nearly fell of my chair when i spotted this on wikipedia, it's about PC Simon Harwood:

"The Guardian reported that the officer had faced a misconduct hearing early in his career with the Met, but had retired before being disciplined, then had re-applied to join the force. The misconduct allegation arose out of a road-rage incident he became involved in while on sick leave with a shoulder injury, during which he reportedly tried to arrest the other driver, who complained that the officer had used unnecessary force. Before the misconduct case was heard, the officer retired from the Met on medical grounds and was awarded a pension. Several years later, he rejoined the Met as a civilian computer worker, then applied to join the police in Surrey, just outside London, as an officer. The unresolved disciplinary issue should have shown up during vetting, but appears not to have, either when he joined the Surrey force, or when he applied for a transfer back into the Met."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can just imagine the briefing for riot police in future.

'Allright boys, control the crowd, but remember - no pushing!' :rolleyes:

Remember that pissed up bloke who was taking the p1ss walking up and down the line, total tit, he was moved on like at every football match or altercation in town, and guess what - it's on youtube and a copper got crucified for it. We should have called him a taxi.:(

FFS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook

I don't get this at all - no charges at all? So it is ok for the police to beat people around the head whilst their back is turned?

They were extremely unwilling to reccomend a charge of manslaugter, let alone murder.

In principle, a lesser charge of assault could have been made. However, there is a limitation on when a charge for assault can be made. It is six months.

I am sure, of course, it is entirely coincidental that the enquiry took significantly longer than six months to conduct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook

As soon as we start killing them in revenge, they will remember they are vastly outnumbered.

Until then nothing will happen.

yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't really at all keen on the whole 'RIP Raoul Moat - You Legend' thing at all.

The problem is the more I think about it the more I think there's an horrendous double standard. A lot of the Moat comments were along the lines of the system failed him and didn't help with his mental illness.

Basically, it seems like it's alright for the likes of Lord Longford to campaign for the release of Myra Hindley and for the privileged liberal elite Guardian set to 'feel the pain' of criminals but, when the lower orders take a similar tack they're dismissed as scum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Outraged as I am by this travesty, your suggestion re "revenge" does seem at bit ott.

Perhaps you can suggest an alternative that would effective?

Non violent protest like erm the G20 ends up with the police beating random passers-by to death and getting off with it scot free.

Policing in this country has reached the point that armed and armoured thugs with a history of violence can kill with impunity and their own superiors will cover it up, get a corrupt coroner to rule the death was not suspicious, the CPS refuse to prosecute and the guy in charge of the 'independent' police complaints commission is the guy that got away with shooting an innocent man in the head while he was on the way to work.

So how else exactly do you think they will change their minds unless we do it for them? The current government could have put a stop to this charade but chose not to, they are too busy introducing slavery in the name of fairness...

Peaceful protest doesn't work.

Faith in the law doesn't work.

Democratic change of government doesn't work.

Any other ideas for a peaceful resolution to this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest the family consider launching a fund raising campaign for a properly funded private prosecution.

If they did that they could even hire some guys who were good at their jobs not the winkies the men in grey would put on the file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest the family consider launching a fund raising campaign for a properly funded private prosecution.

If they did that they could even hire some guys who were good at their jobs not the winkies the men in grey would put on the file.

The CPS has the power to take over and stop any private prosecution on multiple grounds including insufficient evidence.

The CPS has already decided that there is insufficient evidence (apparently these days juries are not allowed to decide that for themselves) so your suggestion would go nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have an authority to support that assertion?

Oh, you are quite right, just found it on the idiots guide.

They have a discretionary power to take over ....

Well I would have thought any unreasonable exercise of this power would be vulnerable to a judicial review.

Indeed their decision not to prosecute may well be similarly vulnerable but I wouldn't bother with that route myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peaceful protest doesn't work.

Faith in the law doesn't work.

Democratic change of government doesn't work.

Any other ideas for a peaceful resolution to this?

Peaceful protest never works... only hyperviolence works as said Iraq 2003 protest if 1 million people turned up with guns and took the capital apart the British army would be so busy fighting the insurrection the iraq war would not happen and all 646 MPs would be strung up or crucified in Wembley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think quorky? Do you think your army buddies will attack Brits when the orders come? I don't think they would.

Normally I'd say no - if it was the Paras though, I'd be more worried. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have an authority to support that assertion?

Oh, you are quite right, just found it on the idiots guide.

They have a discretionary power to take over ....

Well I would have thought any unreasonable exercise of this power would be vulnerable to a judicial review.

Indeed their decision not to prosecute may well be similarly vulnerable but I wouldn't bother with that route myself.

And I would have thought that in a civilised society beating a man walking home from work to death on camera would have been seen by the authorities as a unreasonable exercise of the power invested in police officers.

Apparently I was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren't we all.

My view is just that we don't start killing people until all peaceful mechanisms of dealing with this awfulness have been exhausted and we are satisfied that killing people in this circumstance is reasonable and that there is no alternative.

I don't think we are at that point yet.

And, with respect, I think you and ken are speaking more in anger than considered reflection, which is fine, anger has its place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, with respect, I think you and ken are speaking more in anger than considered reflection, which is fine, anger has its place.

Not really my anger explodes out in random bouts, like last week when I was screwed over on the contract.... They are so far attempting to ignore me..... I just want my money back those SOBs, I don't want to force specific performance or any bs like that I want it back so I can board a plane east and see whats out there as I think effectively I have exhausted all fruitful avenues over this side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Peaceful protest never works... only hyperviolence works ...."

Oh sorry, silly me.

I just thought that sounded a bit angry.

I dunno constantly being dumped on has made me significantly angrier than in past times, in the past I remember being incredibly docile in subserviance to my bosses, yet when I came back I saw right through it and became an significantly angrier person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Copied from comments in the statesman. Pretty....bad if it's true.

The CPS lawyer who made the decision was the same one who decided no officer should face charges for the shooting dead of Jean Charles de Menezes by police who mistook him for a terrorist. That shooting happened five years ago yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren't we all.

My view is just that we don't start killing people until all peaceful mechanisms of dealing with this awfulness have been exhausted and we are satisfied that killing people in this circumstance is reasonable and that there is no alternative.

I don't think we are at that point yet.

And, with respect, I think you and ken are speaking more in anger than considered reflection, which is fine, anger has its place.

Not really it is sadly, considered reflection.

Take female emancipation, we are told a story that there were a few daintily dressed ladies who marched a couple of times and one threw herself in front of a horse in a tiz the silly thing. Then the nice powers that were decided it was terrible and women should have the vote immediately.

In reality there was serious violence involved. Riots, assaults on policemen, bombs, stuff got burned to the ground, blokes beating the crap out 'feminists' etc etc

They even bombed David Lloyd George's house.

I bet they left the nasty bits out when you studied it at school right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are wrong.

How about it was something as fundamental as WWI that lead to women getting the vote and all the smashing up of stuff including Lloyd George's house didn't?

And I never studied the women's votes stuff at school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are wrong.

How about it was something as fundamental as WWI that lead to women getting the vote and all the smashing up of stuff including Lloyd George's house didn't?

And I never studied the women's votes stuff at school.

Given that Martin McGuinness was present and armed on Bloody Sunday, and his position now. It does rather suggest that extreme violence behind a cause, political or otherwise, does get results. And, not only that, society's collective moral view about the perpetrators of such violence is decidedly mobile, to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 277 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.