Safe Speed Forums

I haven't been arguing for any stringing up of anybody (in this case at least).

As an aside, what are the odds of an 85 yo man running down an 85 yo woman?

To upright man aged 85 years - a tagging order ist perhaps biggest humilation even if he ist not likely to go out clubbing in wee small hours. Und in any case - if he decide to o on SAGA coach holiday or something - ist not possible with a tag order. So ist perhaps a dgrading punishment for elderly gent.



As I read it - little old lady walk in road without looking for traffic. Little old man come along at 30 mph (und believes that 30 mph does not kill und here we explode the danger of this harping on speed when it should be C O A S T Governmement say "30 mph for reason" und Swiss felines say NEIN! NEIN NEIN! und argue it should be C O A ST for a reason ) . She ist in middle of road - ist she at crossing bollard und just steps out? Ist not clear from article. Ist she in dark clothes? Or has old guy got some tunnel vision? Has soem other hazard attracted his attention in this 6 second making his reaction appear late? Ist not condoning but trying to see what ist bigger picture und ban und retest seem appropriate given situtation. A tag seems absolutely dumb decision in this case to me.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

No, I don't think it is...

There was an experiment done in London, some 25-odd years ago, to examine the effects of making jaywalking illegal, the "red line experiment" - red lines were painted along kerbs to mark areas where pedestrians were not to cross the road, equivalent to yellow lines and parking, and a similar fixed penalty system was mooted (if not actually introduced, I can't remember). It was discontinued as a failure "because pedestrians refused to cooperate".

One could suggest that the "great camera experiment" has both been a failure in reducing casualties and has certainly not been receiving a lot of cooperation from motorists... I wonder why it hasn't been scrapped too? £££

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

AIUI, the charge was 'Careless Driving'. He was found guilty.
Now, what is hard to comprehend is the Mags's thinking regarding the tagging. They applied a fine, a ban and a requirement for a re-test. Maybe that was entirely appropriate. But to tag an old man, it's hard to believe how inhuman this must have seemed to him.
Did he set out to deliberately have an accident, or really not care whether he had an accident or not?
Was he a habitual lunatic in a vehicle?
Did he threaten to 'come round at night and break someone's windows'?Was he an on-going threat to his neighbours and to society at night?
For goodness sake, are we now to punish OAP's for making mistakes by degrading and humiliating them in their final years?
What sort of idiots do we have as magistrates these days? Are they 'brain-dead'. We seem to have the lunatics running the asylum now.
The judge who overturned the tagging order and described it as 'inappropriate' was absolutely correct. It's a pity he couldn't pass sentence on the magistrates by tagging them for causing much distress to an elderly man who just made a mistake.

The brain dead idiots are not magistrates but people who allow their personal prejudice to over ride the truth.
If you read the first post in this thread it says clearly "District Judge" ie a paid, professionally qualified lawyer and not a bench of three lay magistrates.

As a JP I accept criticism that has even a hint of truth in it - yours doesn't. Lay magistrates are a bunch of people who put in a lot of time and effort to ensure that ordinary people have a say in the justice system.

Really! These 'ordinary' people as you say, appear to be those who only have to say "on benefits your worship." They then receive a paltry fine while us buggers whom work are hammered, justice my arse!!, that said that's probably down to the guidelines again.

To be fair, the continued changing of guidelines and dumbing down of descretionary powers that many JPs' are faced with, is why so many are leaving.

Welcome back Fisherman
I am guilty too of jumping to the same conclusion Cooperman made:

Us lay people normally associate magistrates courts with magistrates.
It was repeated later, just after the ONLY reference to the District Judge,


Now you have cleared that up, could you fill us in on the various tiers of the judicial system at work? I was only aware of magistrates and crown court - having taken part in both.
Where does the District Judge fit in, and what qualifies a case for his judgement, rather than either of the other two?
Are the judges in civil cases the same ones who sit in criminal cases?

Sorry to put upon you like this, but there's no substitue for hearing it from "the horses mouth" (as opposed to the horses a**e in the pub! ).
Please accept my word that describing you as the horses mouth is not defamatory, and I also have to be careful of my use of emoticons, in case I upset the thought police!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Even if I were to accept that the appalling attacks on Magistrates in this thread are due to lack of knowledge rather than malice, just think for a while -

This site prides itself on the accuracy of the statistical analysis that fills so many threads. Instances that seem to prove that speed kills are dismissed as anomalies, blips, etc. with much maths to back up the assertion.

In 2002, which is the most recent year I have figures for, magistrates courts dealt with a total of 2.4 MILLION defendants.

On the basis of ONE case all Magistrates are either idiots, brain dead or lunatics.

Perhaps someone would like to show me the maths that makes that statisically valid?



To change the subject.

I used to enjoy posting here. Sadly the sudden appearance of your protest forum pushed this site too far into politics for me to be able to continue to be able to participate.
I do, however, return occasionally to have a look and on this occasion was unable to let such a thread go unchallenged.

I am horrified to see how much this, once respected site, has moved from its previous "you must be able to justify what you post" attitude into one of the standard paranoia fuelled "them and us", attack the system even when its not justified sites.

Well, I'm afraid that's exactly what automated enforcement has contributed for the judicial system, 'them and us'. Like my post above indicates, it is not for those lay persons whom act as Magistrates at fault here. You do after all follow various acts and codes of practises and I would be interested to know as to whether or not, in your learned opinion, whether you think your powers of descretion have been wiltered down within the last few years?

It is also an unfortunate fact, that our judicial system at all levels has been politicised and undermined by a vexatious Government whom wish to make laws absolute through the automated system, then through the Courts. More and more proceedings are being reviewed to set precident as clearly our legal professionals are caught in a 'tug of war' with regards to interpretation of law and the conflict between that of English law and European. The law itself has become a minefield and with the internet providing persons with extra knowledge, has allowed 'ordinary people' to also take advantage and question further what may be determined as bad law. This is perhaps another reason why judicial reviews are being conducted and why many judges are at odds with a Government whom meddle in everything. So yes indeed, the argument has become political to an extent.

Whilst indeed, you as a Magistrate will weigh proceedings based upon the law and subsequently, the will of parliament, just as important is the public interest element. I get very annoyed when I hear those within the legal profession saying "we do as parliament tells us," when in fact parliament is still and I hope always will be subserviant to the Crown. You swear an oath to the crown, not to parliament.

That said, I am for keeping the current system of lay Magistrates as I'd rather have 'commoners' weighing up proceedings than lawyers anyday of the week. That said, I believe it will become more apparent, that as law becomes more complex (quite on purpose in my view), I think that Magistrates courts will become more irrelevant. I hope that day doesn't come but it is surely on the cards.

Sorry if I've caused any offence, but the logic and reasoning behind the 'tagging' of a very elderly gentleman for a one-off driving mistake does beggar belief.
Am I completely wrong in thinking that the idea of tagging is to keep out of prison those who, if allowed complete freedom, may re-offend against our society and/or in order to complete a prison sentance whilst still able to re-integrate into the community and have a job, etc.
How on earth does this align with an elderly person in his final years?
What it does show is that the district judge was either foolish, vindictive or just past his 'sell-by' date. I know not which, but to tag a man in his 80's was humiliating, de-grading, unfair, inhuman and grossly unnecessary.
Thank goodness for the appeal judge.
To return to the subject of magistrates for a moment, I have no doubt that the majority do their jobs to the best of their ability and judgement.
However, there have certainly been some strange punishments over the years. How much of this is due to the gov't guidelines I don't know, but magistrates must show more awareness of the agendas (or is it agendae?) being pushed forward by this gov't for political ends. The continued persecution of drivers is but one example, the imprisonment of pensioners for failure to pay council tax is another. If the mags concerned with these two cases had any backbone, they would have very publicly stood-down from the bench at the point of sentencing and walked away from the issue. Now that would have shown their humanity and understanding. In any other case of debt a bailiff would be instructed, but not in this case as it was purely political.

I don't believe that's true. Yes there are some angry people here. Yes sometimes they make statements that are not fully justified. But the core of regular posters is an extremely serious and careful group. Sometimes the daily message total exceeds 200 in a 24 hour period. There are bound to be a few that fall short of the standards we would wish for.

I still believe that there's no higher standard of broad road safety discussion available anywhere.

I'm absolutely delighted that you posted again. Please don't let a few over enthusiastic members put you off.

And please remembers that many people perceive that magistrates' sentences for 'real' criminals are often milder than sentences for technical motoring offences. This is an area where you could work to build bridges and defuse myths. PLEASE do so if you feel able.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

But even so - the lay magistrates are supposed to listen to the advice given by the clerk of the court and the guidelines per the Bench Books. We cannot be sure if this was the case nor even if this rather OTT initial punishment was handed down by a Stipend.

With respect there are some who give way to putting their politically correct training into practice as well - throw in a weakly prepared CPS case or some "i" not dotted properly by BiB and we get hammered by the press.


There are others, of course, who apply common sense and chuck away the pee-cee "rule" book

This case, alas, comes across as one which appeared intiailly before the dodos of beaks and was only righted by a qualified lawyer.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Fisherman - we can pick and choose which posts we deem worthy of challenge and banter. The M4 protest... well, it was organised and legal prior warning given and majority kept to the prescribed rules. The cycling fora are currently up in arms over the CM issue - which again boils down to prior warning and organisation in the interests of consideration to other people.



I know mate... and I can understand a lot of it given recent atrocious events, sensationalised journalism which is reported before adequate analysis can be given and I will admit, some economy with the truth to clear things up and fuel further debate and unease. Not helped by over-zealousness on the part of some either....

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Clerks give advice on the law.
This can be absolute eg this offence is not endorseable.
It can be relative eg there is a lot of case law to support both sides, here is a list of the most authoritative on both sides for to use when making your decision.
Decisions are always taken by the bench.

The guidelines are just that, guidelines. They give an indication of a sentencing starting point together with some information as to what may constitute aggravating or mitigating circumstances. Any bench may depart from the guidelines but MUST give clear reasons for doing so.


The press report quoted does say District Judge - which is what used to be called a stipendiary magistrate some years ago.


I would be the first to agree that the press do get things wrong quite often, but its difficult to see how a reporter would mistake 3 JPs for 1 district judge.
Its worth pointing out that, except in exceptional circumstances, appeals from magistrates courts are heard by a bench of 3.
I crown court judge and 2 JPs. The judge has final say on points of law but everything else is done by majority vote.

So IF the press report is correct and IF normal practice was folowed the sentence (right or wrong) was imposed by a lawyer and overturned (rightly or wrongly) by a bench where JPs were in the majority.


I should say that sentencing is very rarely clear cut, which is why we get a LOT of training about it, and that it would not be fair for me to criticise - even by implication - a decision taken by people, who unlike me, had access to all the details.

I haven't suggested otherwise. Protests of that kind are provided for in law and are one of the ways in which people make their views known to parliament.

My problem is that I posted here for a while as a JP.
JPs can participate in any legal political activity as private individuals but must not do so as JPs.

Once the M4 protest forum appeared I lost any chance I had of defending my posting here on the grounds that this is a serious disscussion forum with no overt politics.

At the risk of provoking shouts of "arrogant b*****d" I feel I can do more good as a sitting JP than I can posting here as an ex JP.

Fisherman,

You say that magistrates are not allowed to take part in political activity which I can understand as it may introduce bias.

What I don't understand is how you determined that the M4 protest was political in nature? I thought it was a protest about the inappropriate use of cameras. Perhaps you could expand about what is considered political. Is it anything which seeks to change the law in any way?

This is a genuine enquiry as I have considered putting myself forward as a magistrate and would like to understand the restrictions imposed.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

I suppose you appreciate that the M4 protest forum is hosted here as a courtesy for another organisation? I functioned as road safety spokesman for the M4 protest - no more and no less. In other words, the M4 protest was not a 'Safe Speed' activity.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

It means that we are supposed to be apolitical when carrying out our duties and it also means that a dim view would be taken if we took paret in extreme political rallies or joined the raving loony froinge of extremity. In other words BNP and similar type parties would be a definite

My next door neighbours and next door but one neighbours were checked when I bought my house ass well - just in case I let my friendship and neighbourliness be "compromised". They would not let me move in next door to the local equivalent of the Kray twins - let's put it that way

Not that I would wish to anyway - but that's the guidelines.

They also did a check on my family - including the Swiss riff-raff

I would assume magistrates are subject to similar vetting procedures.

You may wish to check out the following web sites for some general information. But basically to be considered for the first hurdle of interview selection we have to be

1. fit and healthy - though a disabllity does not preclude under the Disabilities Act within reason

2. of good character

3. No more than 3 speeding convictions withing previous 5 years
(used to be different but they know as well as we do that scameras have changed things just a bit





As far a lay magistrates are concerened - personal and social skills as well as intelligence are still essential requirements per this.








It was a demonstrational protest in pretty much the same way as Critical Mass is a form of protest.

As a member of the public with an entitlement to cast my vote in elections in much the same way as Tony Bliar, Geroge Bush, Chirac, etc cast votes in general elections, I am allowed my political voice and free opinion.

As individual in a country which professes to have freedom of speech I have the right to voice an opinion. This allows me to pass comment on a policy which seems to undermine road safety by virtue of a songle flocused message. True road safety reveloves around the bigger picture and actually aiding members of the public to improve their knowledge and skills by giving them the benefit of our own training and experience when we observe sub-standard driving and using objective professional judgement when deciding whether to prosecute or not. But regardless of our decision NIP wise - person stopped understands why they were stopped and why they are to be punished if deemed necessary. They also. hopefully, take away a learnign experience from their encounter with us.

However.....

As a police officer - I do not have the right to allow my private political opinion to prejudge a situation and am required to police all events with an objective and apolitical professionalism.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

But we still cannot escape the effects of political correctness.




But still inappropriate and there have been others in the past. There was also the lady magistrate forced to resign because she dared suggest locking up burglars after being burgled herself.

It is actually quite soul destroying when you know you collared the right person and the magistrates throw in a decision which defies belief.

And of course, our paperwork is really on trial as well.




True - sentencing is not clear cut and with the number of laws introduced - the charging itself can be a minefield at times.

However, having been on a number of training courses myself - I will admit here and now that political correctness inveigles all the time and you have to be astute not to fall under its trance.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.