Today's p*$$ boiler

Anything that doesn't fit elsewhere - doesn't have to be AD related.
User avatar
StressedDave
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:27 am

Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby StressedDave » Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:17 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34604622

I have no problem with the CPS taking over charging decisions but I have absolutely no idea why the cycling community feel that they have the right to special treatment in civil law. As far as I know, outside of some very special circumstances in the Employment Tribunals where the burden of proof shifts (and these aren't strictly civil proceedings), it's down to either side to prove their case.

Those who cycle out there more than I do are welcome to explain.
All posts are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Do what you like with it, just don't make money off it.

Revian
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:58 pm
Location: Wirral

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby Revian » Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:27 pm

I'd agree with the concern...I dont see why these require exceptions to the norm. If it was part of a wider look at the justice system then I could understand it. I don't. The police have had some bad press lately and that doesn't help confidence. (Eg the Tiananmen Square protester...). These maybe exceptions to normal competence but they don't help...
Ian

User avatar
StressedDave
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:27 am

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby StressedDave » Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:04 pm

Again, having spent a lot of time in this particular field, I never saw anything other than professionalism amongst the investigators. But it's so easy to tar such people with the ACAB brush. I've seen a lot less professionalism amongst the prosecutors. It was very difficult to find paperwork (deliberately in many cases) which you knew had been received because you carried the blasted package yourself and got a receipt for it.

It's still better than the old system where Police would recommend charging.
All posts are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Do what you like with it, just don't make money off it.

gannet
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 10:23 am

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby gannet » Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:54 pm

I might have known the CTC* would be mentioned in that article.

Don't think the entire cycling community is behind this change - this was the first I had heard of it.

I do feel for the people affected by accidents (of all kinds), but we also have to believe the Police will do their jobs. It is exactly articles such as these that fuel the them vs us mentality



* I am only a member for the insurance benefit...

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Cotswolds

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby akirk » Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:16 pm

as this statement seems to be about shifting responsibilities between police and CPS I can only see it as an insult to the police, it is implying that the CPS have far more understanding of what happened - now, I am no expert, but doesn't evidence gathering and analysis sit squarely within the police camp? the CPS are the legal bods who prosecute - what special skills do they have that would allow them to do that initial work, or even make a decision based on it?

as for liability being assumed to be the driver's - that would be a fundamental change in our law to guilty until proven innocent - not good... yes there are lots of issues with drivers, but the behaviour and arrogance of some cyclists (esp. in cities) is outrageous - they have a belief that they can do whatever they want and they are always in the right... I cycle as well as drive (as I am sure do many motorists), bu thte outrage and noise is from a very small non-representative %

Alasdair

User avatar
jont-
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:12 am
Location: Flatlands

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby jont- » Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:23 pm

akirk wrote:as for liability being assumed to be the driver's - that would be a fundamental change in our law to guilty until proven innocent

Nah, we lost that years ago. See s172 notices as requirement to identify drivers (rather than police prove who was driving), and the more recent laws about crypto keys.

User avatar
StressedDave
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:27 am

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby StressedDave » Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:40 pm

akirk wrote:as this statement seems to be about shifting responsibilities between police and CPS I can only see it as an insult to the police, it is implying that the CPS have far more understanding of what happened - now, I am no expert, but doesn't evidence gathering and analysis sit squarely within the police camp? the CPS are the legal bods who prosecute - what special skills do they have that would allow them to do that initial work, or even make a decision based on it?

The decision is based on their knowledge of the law. The Police provide evidence and the CPS decide to act on it or not. Analysis is for the judge and jury and any policeman or expert witness stepping beyond that is generally in for a judicial kicking. If it were otherwise, we wouldn't bother with the trial, just find a handy tree and a length of stout rope.
All posts are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Do what you like with it, just don't make money off it.

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Cotswolds

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby akirk » Mon Oct 26, 2015 4:24 pm

StressedDave wrote:
akirk wrote:as this statement seems to be about shifting responsibilities between police and CPS I can only see it as an insult to the police, it is implying that the CPS have far more understanding of what happened - now, I am no expert, but doesn't evidence gathering and analysis sit squarely within the police camp? the CPS are the legal bods who prosecute - what special skills do they have that would allow them to do that initial work, or even make a decision based on it?

The decision is based on their knowledge of the law. The Police provide evidence and the CPS decide to act on it or not. Analysis is for the judge and jury and any policeman or expert witness stepping beyond that is generally in for a judicial kicking. If it were otherwise, we wouldn't bother with the trial, just find a handy tree and a length of stout rope.


but surely the evidence is partly based on analysis of the scene
we measured these skid marks, therefore the speed was xx type of thing...
so police use analysis etc. to build the evidence
then the lawyers analyse that in the context of the law...

Alasdair

Playtent
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:00 pm

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby Playtent » Mon Oct 26, 2015 5:24 pm

One of the main reasons that the CPS took the decision making away from the Police was to reduce the number of lost cases which reflected on the CPS. It also reduced their work load as less cases now go to court. Ive stood in custody many a time where the custody sergeant can't make his mind up, so has charged them and left it to the court to decide.
Now the CPS want a minimum of a 50% chance of success or there's no charge, unless there are public interest considerations such as Police involved, then they'll let the court decide, like the Police used to do many years ago.

Officers then wait on the phone for hours to the CPS (4 hours is the worst) then have to do the file and send it via fax, waiting again for hours whilst all the time the person is in custody. In the mean time the hotel del police is caring for all sorts of strange and wonderful characters who are regularly in custody for 16 + hours. Gone are the days where the officer was in for a quick interview and gone. You'll get no better service and clients are regularly asked to rate the service they received on trip advisor. :lol:

sussex2
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 11:43 am

Re: Today's p*$$ boiler

Postby sussex2 » Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:14 am

Fax? Next you'll be telling us they still use quill pens ;)


Return to “General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests