Innocent motorists to lose court costs?
This should be read carefully, and its implications deeply considered.
Sorry Smudger to have rustled this from one of your threads, but the blatant cheek deserves a thread of its own.
We already hear of police and the CPS going OTT and getting things wrong. Just imagine the freedom they would have for their cavalier actions if they were not fettered by the inconvenience of legal costs for dragging an innocent person through the courts; simply being able to say, "that's your problem, you shouldn't have defended yourself, even if we were in the wrong".
What kind of justice is that? If the government are concerned tha they can't afford the costs of prosecuting an innocent motorist, the onus is on the police and the CPS to make sure they have their facts correct before stampedinig over innocent people.
I remember another tyrant, about 70 years ago, who withdrew privileges of justice from a specific group of people. Will we have the fear of jackbooted policemen calling in the night, and even another crystal-night, where our windscreens are smashed in, and be herded into "motorist ghettos" whilst they decide further inhuman plans.
Last edited by Snowball; 23-10-09 at 18:38.
Yea! Snowball, that is why I posted that link, as I thought it was the thin edge of a Big wedge!
Yet things like this can slip into being law, before the public get a chance to voice their opinion
Agree with both of you on that, so I have also signed.
I've just signed as well.
Everybody should have the right to contest a prosecution, no matter what's in their bank account.
The following incident shows how an innocent person can be caught up in an altercation with the law.
One of our caravanning friends used to be an HGV driver. A few years ago, whilst away with his wagon on the continent, his wife was visited by the police to say that his car had been involved in an armed robbery. The instruction was that he should contact the police immediately he returned to the UK.
He duly made contact, and explained that he was out of the country. The police said that he could still have come back by plane, carried out the crime, and returned the same way afterwards. Our friend is by no means a weak person, but he did become very worried by the situation.
As it turned out, the matter was resolved without it getting that far. Apparently, his car had previously been one of an identical fleet, and a witness had got one character of the registration wrong.
This is just one example of how an innocent driver can become ensnared in a vehicle-related incident.
The resultant court costs incurred by the authorities is irrelevant.
To show the degree of unfairness, consider an innocent driver being refused reimbursement of costs, as opposed to not infrequent cases where someone genuinely guilty of a criminal offence has escaped because the police/CPS have bungled their facts, and the "criminal" is then awarded compensation for wrongful arrest.
Who other than an incompetent and/or biased government could even dream up such unequal rights in law?
Firstly, apologies to Smudger for having missed it first time round and many thanks to Snowball for having raised it.
I have signed.
This is such a serious inroad into democracy that we should be circulating it to all our friends. I've just posted it on the British Rally Forum and have emailed our car club secretary and another car club I belong to. Friends & family mail-out to follow.
Of course, when a driver/vehicle owner is pulled in for prosecution, how many wrongly-accused, innocent victims are going to just accept any fines/penalties and pay up because they are too afraid of the risks of insurmountable legal costs which they know cannot be recovered, even if they win their case?
This must be about the most sinister revenue tool that a British government has yet devised.
Our servicemen are giving their lives to fight tyranny and injustice, yet our own government is, at the same time, introducing legislation by the back door to restrict freedom for justice for UK citizens.
Make no mistake; once the principle is enshrined into UK law, then the way is open for Heaven knows what ideas could be thrust upon us. Is our government comfortable with a country where justice in law is restricted to the privileged and financially powerful?
If so, then we have something to seriously worry about.
I posted a link to that article on my ex services web site, and it got a lot of replies, very similar to the ones here.
In the mid-'70s, I was arrested for an offence I did not commit. My brother had hit a man for some reason, and there was confusion as to which of him had committed the offence. I opted to go to Crown Court, and the charge was reduced to be dealt with by Magistrates. I paid out a lot of money for a Barrister to represent me, as I knew the Magistrates supported Police Prosecutions at that time. All in all, it cost me thousands of pounds, and I lost my job on the 'no smoke without fire' principle. I was found Not Guilty, and the Magistrates ordered that I could not pursue costs from the Police for either a false imprisonment or a spurious prosecution. This was because it was known that only one person had hit the man, and my brother had admitted to it. So being on the losing side financially for a wrong prosecution is not really new.
You missed your vocation, Rolebama. Should have gone into politics; as an MP you could have got it all back in expenses. MP's weren't having to watch their backs at that time. Ha,ha!