IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Why do we bail and not remand?
TallDarkAndHands...
post Mar 22 2010, 11:33 AM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,023
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=12792


An offender with a record of violence is free to walk the streets of Newbury until April 8th.

Makes you feel all warm inside knowing people like this are wandering about.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Mar 22 2010, 11:40 AM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



You also wonder why they dignify a convicted criminal with 'Mr' in the NWN report.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bloggo
post Mar 22 2010, 11:44 AM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,863
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 41



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Mar 22 2010, 11:33 AM) *
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=12792


An offender with a record of violence is free to walk the streets of Newbury until April 8th.

Makes you feel all warm inside knowing people like this are wandering about.

The law neither represents us or protects us. It has lost it's meaning for many of us law-abiding citizens as it puts the rights of the criminal before ours.
A shameful and unfair system that needs to be reveiwed.


--------------------
Bloggo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bloggo
post Mar 22 2010, 11:46 AM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,863
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 41



QUOTE (JeffG @ Mar 22 2010, 11:40 AM) *
You also wonder why they dignify a convicted criminal with 'Mr' in the NWN report.

A misguided address very similar to Members of Parliment refering to themselves as "the right honourable"


--------------------
Bloggo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Mar 22 2010, 11:52 AM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



(Going completely off-topic, only members of the Privy Council are referred to as "right honourable". Ordinary members are just "honourable" - so they like us to think. smile.gif )
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bloggo
post Mar 22 2010, 11:55 AM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,863
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 41



QUOTE (JeffG @ Mar 22 2010, 11:52 AM) *
(Going completely off-topic, only members of the Privy Council are referred to as "right honourable". Ordinary members are just "honourable" - so they like us to think. smile.gif )

A contradiction in terms eh!!!!


--------------------
Bloggo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
x2lls
post Mar 22 2010, 03:25 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,597
Joined: 25-November 09
Member No.: 511



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Mar 22 2010, 11:33 AM) *
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=12792


An offender with a record of violence is free to walk the streets of Newbury until April 8th.

Makes you feel all warm inside knowing people like this are wandering about.



This area has far more than it's fair share of morons. Still, I suppose we would do well in a 'spot the braincell' competition.


--------------------
There their, loose loser!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Mar 22 2010, 03:39 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (x2lls @ Mar 22 2010, 03:25 PM) *
This area has far more than it's fair share of morons. Still, I suppose we would do well in a 'spot the braincell' competition.

Who are you referring to? This thread, site or St Georges Ave? unsure.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
x2lls
post Mar 22 2010, 07:41 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,597
Joined: 25-November 09
Member No.: 511



QUOTE (Iommi @ Mar 22 2010, 03:39 PM) *
Who are you referring to? This thread, site or St Georges Ave? unsure.gif



The subject matter of this topic.


--------------------
There their, loose loser!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jayjay
post Mar 23 2010, 07:46 AM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,012
Joined: 22-September 09
Member No.: 357



QUOTE (x2lls @ Mar 22 2010, 07:41 PM) *
The subject matter of this topic.


Can you elaborate a bit x2lls. You appear to be saying you approve of vicious, violent louts running around Newbury. I am sure you are either not saying that, or there is more to the story.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
x2lls
post Mar 23 2010, 12:24 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,597
Joined: 25-November 09
Member No.: 511



QUOTE (Jayjay @ Mar 23 2010, 07:46 AM) *
Can you elaborate a bit x2lls. You appear to be saying you approve of vicious, violent louts running around Newbury. I am sure you are either not saying that, or there is more to the story.



How do you think I approve of such behaviour?, which in no way I do.
My comment was referring to my own experience of such morons as mentioned by the original post. The reference to a spot the braincell competition was meant to be derogatory in regard to said morons.


--------------------
There their, loose loser!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jo Jo
post Apr 3 2010, 01:42 AM
Post #12


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22-March 10
Member No.: 792



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Mar 22 2010, 11:33 AM) *
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=12792


An offender with a record of violence is free to walk the streets of Newbury until April 8th.

Makes you feel all warm inside knowing people like this are wandering about.



He was on bail for a whole year before the case even went to court, in my opinion he should have been locked up straight away for this type of hate crime. A violent man was wandering about in Newbury and no one knew apart from the police and the victim. Well done NWN for keeping Newbury residents updated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Berkshirelad
post Apr 3 2010, 10:51 AM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 810
Joined: 13-August 09
Member No.: 271



QUOTE (Jo Jo @ Apr 3 2010, 01:42 AM) *
He was on bail for a whole year before the case even went to court, in my opinion he should have been locked up straight away for this type of hate crime.



Sorry, but what he did, did not become a 'crime' until he was convicted.

The law is based on innocent until proven guilty (except perhaps for motoring offences ohmy.gif ). This is why there is a presumption of bail rather than remand within the law.

Whilst it might have seemed right in this case to impose immediate custody, there has as a norm - for the protection of the freedom of us all - to be measured justice in a court of law rather than immediate custody. This is also why, for a remanded defendant who is found guilty, a credit for time served on remand when sentencing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post Apr 5 2010, 08:25 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Apr 3 2010, 11:51 AM) *
Sorry, but what he did, did not become a 'crime' until he was convicted.

The law is based on innocent until proven guilty (except perhaps for motoring offences ohmy.gif ). This is why there is a presumption of bail rather than remand within the law.

Whilst it might have seemed right in this case to impose immediate custody, there has as a norm - for the protection of the freedom of us all - to be measured justice in a court of law rather than immediate custody. This is also why, for a remanded defendant who is found guilty, a credit for time served on remand when sentencing.


I don't think you read the article correctly, he was found guilty of the offence, it was a violent attack and he has previous for similar offences. He is out on bail while they make up their minds what the punishment should be. In my view he should have been placed in custody until April 8th and if it was knocked off what must be a custodial sentence then so be it. Pity the wheels of justice took a year to get there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Apr 5 2010, 08:58 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Mar 22 2010, 12:33 PM) *
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=12792


An offender with a record of violence is free to walk the streets of Newbury until April 8th.

Makes you feel all warm inside knowing people like this are wandering about.


It seems that the police no longer represent the public but put the interests of the criminal first.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jeven
post Apr 6 2010, 12:02 AM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 19-November 09
Member No.: 498



QUOTE (GMR @ Apr 5 2010, 09:58 PM) *
It seems that the police no longer represent the public but put the interests of the criminal first.


Eh? Surely the decision of remand or bail is up to the judge not the Police. The Police are only involved as far as arresting people and then passing the decision of whether to charge to the CPS who then hope the judge (and jury if it gets that far) make a good decision on behalf of the public.

The Police are constantly complaining that they have some criminals who they arrest pretty much every week but the judges still give them lenient sentences (or even worse community 'punishments'). In fact I remember some local police saying that if you put away about 15 - 20 criminals the crime in the area would be reduced by ~ 80% (until some new ones came along to fill the void.)

As much as I love a good, unreasoned, police bashing in this case they aren't even involved slightly in the process which is to blame.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jo Jo
post Apr 7 2010, 06:58 PM
Post #17


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22-March 10
Member No.: 792



QUOTE (GMR @ Apr 5 2010, 08:58 PM) *
It seems that the police no longer represent the public but put the interests of the criminal first.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jo Jo
post Apr 7 2010, 07:01 PM
Post #18


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22-March 10
Member No.: 792



The young police officer that was responsible for this case did an excellent job. rolleyes.gif

Let's see what punishment he gets tomorrow.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Apr 7 2010, 08:28 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE ([b][u]Jeven[/u][/b] @ Apr 6 2010, 01:02 AM) *

Eh? Surely the decision of remand or bail is up to the judge not the Police. The Police are only involved as far as arresting people and then passing the decision of whether to charge to the CPS who then hope the judge (and jury if it gets that far) make a good decision on behalf of the public.


Yes, if it gets that far. But as a recent Panorama programme has shown that the police don’t always to cases to the CPS to save on paperwork. And we are talking about serious cases.



Also; the police can give warnings or make them sign contracts. Neither is true justice.

QUOTE
The Police are constantly complaining that they have some criminals who they arrest pretty much every week but the judges still give them lenient sentences (or even worse community 'punishments'). In fact I remember some local police saying that if you put away about 15 - 20 criminals the crime in the area would be reduced by ~ 80% (until some new ones came along to fill the void.)


I agree that is also the case. But not the total story; read above.

QUOTE
As much as I love a good, unreasoned, police bashing in this case they aren't even involved slightly in the process which is to blame.


As I pointed out not all police bashing are ‘unreasoned’. Also many others on here have also pointed that out as well.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Apr 7 2010, 08:28 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (Jo Jo @ Apr 7 2010, 08:01 PM) *
The young police officer that was responsible for this case did an excellent job. rolleyes.gif

Let's see what punishment he gets tomorrow.



Which case?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th November 2019 - 10:40 PM