Forum Topic

Judge who interfered with bail should be sacked out of hand!!!

Judges should do only what they are paid to do and that is to listen to evidence and then direct Juries to do there job, they should not make the Police's job harder by making stupid decisions that they really have no knowledge about. Where do you think this Judge lives in a very protected area does he take his life in his hands on a daily basis by catching a train or bus probably not, his driver collects him and drops him off. After work he'll drop into his club to have a quite meal and a scotch because it is safer and then be taken home after a really hard safe day sitting on his *rse. What gives him the right to alter a law,we need the Police to be able to do there jobs efficiently and effectively not to have to cow-tail to the Judicial, the government should introduce legislation to ensure that in future Judges do only what they are paid to do and that is to ensure that a trial is run fairly. Not interfere!!!

Dawn Hardy ● 5153d33 Comments

You are very adept at avoiding an answer to a question, do you or do you not agree that Bimbo Ayelabola should be allowed to stay here after deliberately taking a fertility drug to ensure that she had multiple birth's(5 babies) and arranged a 6 month visa to coincide with her visit here that will be a drain on our resources for the next 20 years. Make that little brain box work and come up with a good plausible argument.

Dawn Hardy ● 5146d

Dawn your post is again full of you putting your word in other peoples mouths in this case mine; as for the stabbings you seem to be the only person putting this information about I have not seen any credible source reporting on it and anyway why are you posting on this post about it; you are quick enough to criticise others (me) for this!  In regared to the state of the nation we can't afford to educate our children, look after are elderly, care for our sick or support our unemployed yet we have loads of money to fight wars and make are arms producers mega rich, our nation is not poor we are just being ripped off.

Philip Walsh ● 5146d

What is one supposed to expect from your response, here you are a person who is victimized and put upon each and every day by the police, you are so harassed that you just do not have time to comment upon the stabbing's that have occurred in Brentford in the last week,WHY??? because they did not concern you.SO!! you believe that it was right for  Bimbo Ayelabola to plan and execute her FERTILITY pregnancy to get into England.We now have the expense of 6 people to feed clothe and house for the next 20 years at least and YOU agree with that do you. We as a country are practically bankrupt, we have no money, I pay 20% income tax on my pension just how much tax do you pay or not!!! and you think that I am a racist for disagreeing with this woman's plan for a cushy life at both mine and the rest of the taxpayers expense.

Dawn Hardy ● 5147d

Judges can make mistakes!!! I remember a horrid Judge Pickles who gave a pedophile a 3 year suspended sentence providing he went to a psychiatrist once a week for that 3 year period, wait for it!!! because the Judge thought that the 5 year old victim was precocious and so he(the Judge)understood why!! that bar-steward raped that little girl. The Judge was removed however the sentence stood(What a sentence!!!)

Dawn Hardy ● 5147d

Dawn most of your posts contain a reference to foreigners, its mostly derogatory, they are either responsible for something bad happening or they are scroungers, that's fact!  How else is any one supposed to interpret your postings.

Philip Walsh ● 5147d

You idiotic little person, don't you dare call me racist, you should have learnt by now, I never write about anything that I am not pretty damn sure of. A Judge has a duty to the whole and he should have given this information to Parliament not to the media. You have still not answered my question as to how this particular loophole has been around for decades and has not been utilized by one and all???

Dawn Hardy ● 5147d

You all appear to believe that I think the Police sacrosanct I don't. Hypothetically a rapist or a murderer is let go whilst police are continuing there investigation and commits another crime, what would our reaction be, disgust rage at the incompetence of the police(Unfair)

Dawn Hardy ● 5147d

As I said Dawn simply does not understand the issue she posted on.  Getting her facts mixed up with her own fears and racist attitudes seems to be the conmen theme of her postings,  thankfully she'e not involved in the justice process.

Philip Walsh ● 5147d

I'm sorry the government are introducing emergency legislation to 'plug this loophole'. Our law, since the middle ages, says that people must be charged or released, preferably within 24 hours. The police have been getting away with this 'police bail' business for far too long.

Susan Kelly ● 5147d

Vanessa - totally agree with you. One of the pillars of a sophisticated democracy is a division of executive and judiciary. For someone to think that a judge would  'do something just so he could get his name in the papers' is just bonkers!

Sara Dodd ● 5148d

Well done to Parliament for putting the  Emergency Legislation designed to reverse the controversial judgement on Police Bail on Thursdays agenda.

Dawn Hardy ● 5148d

For God's sake - the Judge WAS upholding the law the way it was framed, he had no option but to make sure people were treated accordingly, I doubt he did anything "just so he could get his name in the papers". Obviously all the Police forces in this country had to be informed, and the Home Secretary is now dealing with this. He was protecting people - by ensuring the letter of the law is upheld, you can't just have people making it up as they go along.

Vanessa Smith ● 5149d

Of course we need our Law's made by Parliament to be upheld, this Judge had an ideal opportunity to inform Parliament that there was indeed a loophole that needed to be closed, not to announce it to the criminal world in general just so he could get his name in the papers. He has a duty to protect all not just a selective few.

Dawn Hardy ● 5149d

Well mate not being a thug or drug user or either a thief,drunk or bully and I am not on the dole then NO I really don'y understand the nasty Old Bill I just rightly or wrongly depend on them to patrol and protect my community. What however I do understand is that the Police in general have a very difficult time(and yes as in all companies you have the few who it would be better for our community if they were off elsewhere) Judges should whilst in court ensure that procedures are run effectively and efficiently, protecting the victims not scalawags. What right did a Judge recently have to interfere with a decision that should have sent a murderer back to his own Country.The Judge gave Human Rights and the fact that he thought that the Immigrant Murderer would be in danger if sent back to his Country.  Tough Luck what about the Murder Victim and Family. Mr.Walsh I wonder what your reaction would be if it concerned one of your own, your attitude would soon change no doubt!

Dawn Hardy ● 5149d

I presume that question was meant for Dawn, Her problem seems to be she doesn't understand the issue she posted about.

Philip Walsh ● 5149d

But surely you want the Judiciary to uphold the law and make sure the Police adhere to it.  If so, what's your beef?

Patricia Nicholas ● 5149d

100k I wish! you really are in a world of your own dear.  The point the judge was making was that the police were not adhering to the law.

Philip Walsh ● 5151d

Last year you told us all on this Forum that you had been recompensed by 100k and was able to move to a new shop. I wasn't filling in blanks, it was the inference that you gave.We most certainly cannot have a Police Force making there own laws, however laws are made to be adhered to and whether it's liked or not we do depend upon our Police to protect us by doing this we should support them anyway we can. The only other alternative is to have vigilantes on the streets, that means that anybody with a grudge can bring a pack to anyone's house and beat them nearly to death, given that scenario I will have the Police any day.

Dawn Hardy ● 5151d

Dawn mr company has struggled to survive and break even for 14 years my home family and business have been forced almost to breaking point and despite this, the prejudice of the police and people such as yourself, my business has never been shut down.  Indeed on at least two occasions my company had already handed in my notice when the police have smashed up the landlords property. I have never been adequately compensated the value of the goods destroyed / seized is far in excess ot the 1 payment I received. Oh and I didn't say the police ere fencing my equipment that's you filling in the blanks with more blanks!The police do not thankfully make the laws, laws are made in parliament and judges in the court of appeal make rulings on laws all the time.

Philip Walsh ● 5151d

I do agree, I would not wish a Police State onto my worst enemy, one could ask as to why it has taken so long for this error to be found out after all we pay astronomical fees to Solicitors and Lawyers to represent us, you would have thought that they would have found this wonderful loophole before now.

Dawn Hardy ● 5151d

I do not read either of these papers, however I thank you for the explanation, obviously mistakes do unfortunately happen. I am still of the opinion that Judges should stick to the court room, this Judge should have taken the pertinent information to Parliament.

Dawn Hardy ● 5151d

"Judges should not interfere with Police Procedure"They are not - for God's sake. What has been realised is that the law regarding police bail has been wrongly applied. The Judge was quite right to point this out, it is not the fault of the judiciary, the police or the courts. it is a loophole left when the law was drafted that no-one caught on to before. Whatever you may think -none of us would want to live in a police state, in this country they police by consent and preferably within the law too. We must always bear in mind there have been some terrible miscarriages of justice and if this law is not amended there'll be a few more, like it or not.

Vanessa Smith ● 5151d

No it is not correct, Dawn. If you are taken to court you will appear before a magistrate or a judge on a charge and the court will either set bail or remand you in custody. Police bail only applies if they do not have enough evidence to charge you. When the Bristol architect Joanna Yeates was murdered at Christmas last year her landlord was arrested on suspicion and released on police bail.If you are a Sun or Mail reader you will have been persuaded shortly afterwards that he must have been guilty - their lies are always true, aren't they? He was vilified by the press because the lazy police involved thought they had caught their killer. Even after the real killer was arrested and charged the innocent landlord remained on police bail.He claims it ruined his life and forced him to move away from his home because of the threats he received from morons who assumed that the fact he was on bail meant he was guilty of a crime.The issue is not as simple as you think, and the fact that the case which provoked your posting is to be subject to judicial review demonstrates that it is not straightforward.

John Connelly ● 5151d

So you are saying that our Police are corrupt and are Fencing your equipment that they stole from you originally. Are you not just a wee bit prejudiced because your business has been shut down a few times, although you have been more than adequately compensated each time.Yes! we do indeed need protection, police on the streets 24/7 to keep us safe.

Dawn Hardy ● 5151d

Bullies at school,bullies in grown up life, what a waste!!!

Dawn Hardy ● 5151d

Would you please explain what I appear to have done Mr.Connelly, because as far as I am concerned, Judges should not interfere with Police Procedure they have a difficult job as it is.This is pure supposition!! If I am caught breaking the law and arrested,taken to court placed on bail for a maximum of 4 days the Police have to prove my guilt within that time or I am set free. Is this right??

Dawn Hardy ● 5151d

And there I was thinking it was just me!

Vanessa Smith ● 5152d

Many of us have asked that question one way or another; apparently she is real; her reality however is hers alone!

Philip Walsh ● 5152d

Dawn, are you real or are you a spammer having a laugh at everyone else's expense?(If the former, you should think before you type!)

John Connelly ● 5152d

If new evidence is presented the police can again interview a suspect and arrest them; what they can't do is keep dragging you in to the police station as a form of harassment or coercion.As for PACE; you are no longer given a copy of this unless you  asked for it and even then they ignore the requirements. Thousands of pounds worth of my legally owned (not stolen or bought with stolen money or obtained via illegal means and which was not needed as evidence photographic evidence having been obtained) has been Stolen by the police on several occasion. On the last but one occasion Compensation £5,000 had to be paid out.  On the last occasion around £2;000 worth of equipment was taken, no list of the property was given hence no claim can be made.The problem with the police is that they can be over overenthusiastic in attitudes borne from prejudice, ignorance and spite which the public needs to be protected from; when they are and that was the point of the ruling!

Philip Walsh ● 5152d

"Free Legal Advice went out the window with Labour not the Tories"Doh!Again do you not bother to listen or read the reports? The decision to end free legal advice on arrest is due to go through the Commons this week, people will be means tested, it has been sneaked in as part of a far bigger Bill so quite where you get your information from is a mystery to me. There has been an outcry from the legal profession who fear a return to the bad old days before P.A.C.E. when there was no right to see a duty solicitor which led to false confessions and all sorts of allegations between the Police and those held in custody. Since the advent of the right to see a solictor free of charge a lot of dodgy practices have ceased, this just on its own protects both the Police and the general public. Legal Aid is to be restricted even more than it is at present which means access to legal representation will only be the province of the wealthy.

Vanessa Smith ● 5152d

Obviously now that the point of law has been spotted it can be rectified by Legislation as it should be. Judges should not interfere they are there merely to ensure that the Law is upheld not negate Police Investigations. I am ignorant on the points of law. So is it a case of law that I(generalizing again)can be arrested and allowed out on bail,however the Police have only 96 hours to charge me or drop the case against me, if this is the case then surely if I threaten or cajole witnesses I can get away with my crime Scot free, is this not given Carte Blanche to criminals knowing that if they can coerce witnesses then they are without charge. As for the Police bending the rules they have a pretty hard job as it is what with all the do gooders bending the rules to suit the situation.Free Legal Advice went out the window with Labour not the Tories, why good old Labour gave us 2 Metropolitan Police Services 1 Black and 1 White it should not matter what colour you are if you break the law you deserve to be punished. So much trouble and strife left by Labour for the present government to clear up and yet Labour are not blamedand have the audacity to complain however offer no solutions.Typical!!!

Dawn Hardy ● 5152d

Here we go again - had you listened to this story properly you would have learned that this ruling IS a valid point of law - a loophole that no-one had managed to spot over many years. It seems to me that the Judge could have alerted the Lord Chancellor's Office or the MoJ as this cannot be the first time he'd been aware of this situation. The Police have bailed people and then re-arrested them and started the bail period from the beginning again, this Judge - quite properly as I gather, says no you only get one lot of bail - 96 hours and you can't keep going back to the start every time. The law certainly is an ass in a lot of cases but surely no reason to allow the Police to bend it to uphold it. This decision has also been upheld by the High Court and will require legislation through Parliament to correct things. What we ought to be really concerned about are the sneaky proposals to do away with the right to have free legal advice if you get arrested, that right provides protection for both the Police and the public - but as usual the only consideration is cost - sod justice it seems.

Vanessa Smith ● 5153d