A barrister gossips & rants on intellectual property law, the legal system and civil liberties.
About bloody time.
The CPS should now reconsidering their corrupt decision not to give a jury a chance to render an opinion on the firearms officers and senior officers who executed him.
The jury said no culpability of Commander Dick — I disagree but at least a jury got a say.
Details of any fine — potentially unlimited — later.
Certainly the cretinous Sir Ian Blair should ‘consider his position’.
Quickie post.
Geeklawyer is totally fucked off that no-one is going to get nailed and jailed over the cash for honours matter. He does think it comical to see all the politicians and fellow bottom-feeders decrying the length of the investigation and the damage done to the ‘innocent’ and the body politic.
These people were as innocent as Jack the Ripper. It is Geeklawyer’s belief Lord Levy and Ruth Turner were almost certainly a pair of crooks taking direct, oral only — of course, instructions from Tony Bliar to get money:
TB: Mike. how’s the fund raising going?
ML: Ya, not too bad. A lot of these guy are saying ‘what’s in it for me?’, you know, the usual.
TB: Presumably you’re giving them the usual advice? “Give some money to charity, fund an orphanage and we’ll sort you out a peerage”, shit like that?
ML: Yea. ‘natch.
TB: So how much are we getting in?
ML: Not nearly enough. There just aren’t enough rich stupid people in the UK.
TB: No? Can’t we get money off Prince Charles?
ML: Nah, don’t think he need a peerage.
TB: Oh, yea, right. OK heres a list of dodgy businessmen I know. MI5 says most are fraudsters, coke smugglers or crooks but frankly I don’t give a shit, just launder the donation so we can deny knowledge.
ML: I don’t need telling my job Tony.
TB: If you don’t start producing results soon you bastard you won’t have one. Ruth’s available to provide ‘extra services’ if needed.
ML: OK, Tony I’ll crack on. (under breath: ‘Sleazy goy cocksucker.’)
TB: (under breath: ‘Sleazy cocksucker.’)
Geeklawyer reckons that they got off only by the politically corrupt decisions of the CPS. The CPS was always going to decide there was no case to answer. It is an organisation well versed in delivering politically convenient decisions dressed up as laboriously derived independent judgment. It is an amusing paradox that it was initially set up to provide independent judgment from the police on the decision whether to prosecute or not; and rightly so, since the police were a little too keen to use prosecutions tactically. That is, arrest the usual suspects and prosecute innocent family members until the suspects agreed to cop a guilty plea. Ah, how Geeklawyer loved the 1970’s.
The answer, then, is clear. The CPS must retain the prosecution decision except where it relates to public function when the police should make the decision.
Of course outraged parliamentarians want to ensure that no-one washes their dirty laundry in public and are plotting to ‘do a Hutton’ on the police. That is, an elaborate witch hunt enquiry that drags Constable Yates (as he soon will be) through the gorse bushes for having the temerity to do his job.
And the fact that no other copper will ever dare investigate parliamentary corruption again for fear of also falling victim is entirely an incidental benefit unfortunate byproduct of necessary democracy.
The appropriately name Mr Pratt took a fairing view video of himself speeding and doing up to 100mph in a 30mph zone in Somerset, and then posted it to YouTube. Irresponsible without a doubt (though Geeklawyer has a sneaking admiration for his nerve) and posting it to YouTube was pure braggadocio. What beggars belief is that he filmed his own number plate and house, and omitted to delete it from the published film!
Continue reading ‘Mystery YouTube Biker traced in elaborate investigation — found to be a genius’
The conviction rate for rape allegations in the 12 months to March 2005 was a startling 5.3%. This compares to a rate of 33% in the 1980’s. What is going wrong?
Certainly more rapes are now being reported and the CPS is more likely to run trials. This may partly account for the aberration, since I fear that in the 1980’s often the only cases that ran were those which had a high chance of conviction.
Unfortunately rape is a crime which tends to rely on one persons word against another. There are rarely other witness. It is usually a crime committed by someone known to the victim.
Despite the sea changes in society’s attitudes to sexual behaviour it appears that juries go all Dickensian when scrutinising the behaviour of women in the sanitised environment of the jury room. The situation is not assisted when rules to prevent a victims sexual history being put before the court are often side-stepped. A burden of proof of beyond reasonable doubt and a typical sentence of 5 years imprisonment make a jury want to be very sure indeed. Difficult when you are weighing the account of one person against another in circumstances where one or both parties may have been uninhibited due to alcohol or drugs.
An alternative charge of so-called “date rape” has been suggested, where the defendant was reckless as to consent. This may make it easier for juries to convict, but creates a sub-category of rape which is perceived as less morally culpable. For many women (and men) however this notion is abhorrent. It also helps to perpetrate the idea that men are somehow incapable of controlling themselves and therefore should not be held responsible for their actions.
In the meantime assuming a significant number of rapes go unreported and even factoring in a percentage of false allegations Ruthie reckons that currently the chances of getting away with rape must be hovering around the 99% mark.
What a sad and terrifying thought.
Geeklawyer is incredulous. The utterly discredited and ineffectual CPS has predictably whitewashed the killing of de Menezes by the Metropolitan Police. Geeklawyer was always well aware that there was a serious risk of this but that given the controversy and public disquiet over this they would not ‘do the usual’ when examining police malfeasance.
Geeklawyer had always assumed that the officers would face a token manslaughter charge safe in the knowledge that the police are always acquitted by a friendly judiciary and compliant juries with the prosecution deliberately offering weak evidence. And everyone gets to say ‘justice was done’. Continue reading ‘Jean Charles de Menezes: killers escape justice’
Recent Comments