Criminals and the No comment answer

So it is, mind you they are still lying buggers and will fit you up at the first opportunity.
Station interviews don't get to be recorded by the person that gets fitted up as the rozzers won't allow it.
Any recordings they make usually end up accidentally getting lost or being damaged according to what i have seen.

Of course, your mate will deny it all.
You'll just make some insulting remarks.

so who cares....
 
Sponsored Links
I think the reality is somewhere in between.

There is pressure to increase conviction rates and that might mean not just the guilty.


There are miscarriages of justice. Harvey Proctor is one example

This makes interesting reading:
Adverse inferences from exercising what is still called the “right to silence”, were introduced by section 34 of the CJ&POA (interviews) and section 35 (evidence). How can it still even be called a right when you get criticised for exercising it? How many other rights can you think of that result in you being criticised when you exercise them? These act as an invitation to a jury to conclude that a silent defendant must have something to hide and is therefore guilty when there might be all manner of perfectly sensible reasons for not answering police questions in interview (often at a time when the strength of the police evidence is far from clear) or not giving evidence in court when you know you will be no match for a confident well educated barrister.

The right of silence, the right not to incriminate yourself remains in my view, a key pillar of any society that purports to have fair trials and to follow the rule of law. If the prosecution cannot prove a case against someone without getting a confession then my view is the prosecution should not go ahead. I don’t believe that way leads to the end of civilisation. The Americans thought the right not to incriminate yourself was so important it is enshrined in their Constitution, drafted in the 1780s, and I do not think there is any evidence their criminal justice system functions any less well on that account

https://gcnchambers.co.uk/crisis-criminal-justice-system/

I suggest there are three factors at work here that have finally come together to create a perfect storm that has resulted in the situation we now face.

First, there has been over the last twenty or more years a series of changes in the law that were designed and have made the situation of those accused of offences more perilous, reduced their chances of a fair trial and with that their prospects of acquittal, and threatens to increase miscarriages of justice and unjust convictions.

Second, there has been a culture shift especially in relation to sex cases which is now exemplified in a policy that requires the police to ‘believe the victim’ and abandon the principle of investigating a case properly and impartially which in my view has contributed directly to recent miscarriages.

Third, there have been huge cuts in the funding for the police and as a result far fewer officers to do the work. The same has been a recurring problem for the CPS which doesn’t have the resources required to fulfil its mandate. For the legal profession there have been huge cuts in fees for the preparation and running of criminal trials. It came as no surprise to many of us therefore that the old issue of disclosure failures has again reared its head.
 
I know who sells drugs in my neighbourhood, how come my local Police don't ???

If you are able to sit down & think about the full implications of this, then you are half way towards understanding what's gone wrong.
 
Sponsored Links
As Theresa will tell you, cutting police numbers and budgets has no effect on anything.

 
TheresaBlame.jpg
 
Well thats true.

Im amused by the fact TM has managed to P#*$ off loads of MPs
 
"It's all the fault of those stupid MPs, they're a bunch of idiots, and I need them to support me"

Dale Carnegie eat your heart out.
 
OK. So they do know.

Can you explain to the t'internets why they don't shut them down???

I'll offer one possibility.

People will want drugs, end of. That genie is out of the bottle.

As long as the dealers aren't too out of line, it's probably less hassle all round to let it lie.

Take the current dealers out, and who knows what lunatics will fill the void?

Perhaps a case of "better the devil you know"?
 
As long as the dealers aren't too out of line, it's probably less hassle all round to let it lie.

Now here's an interesring thing.

People also want alcohol.

But there are no teens cycling round with a miniature of adulterated homebrew vodka and a mobile phone, taking a pocketful of cash back to the shop and funding organised crime.

Why's that?
 
Now here's an interesring thing.

People also want alcohol.

But there are no teens cycling round with a miniature of adulterated homebrew vodka and a mobile phone, taking a pocketful of cash back to the shop and funding organised crime.

Why's that?
Because people can buy their booze legally?
 
What an interesting thought.

So a controlled market, where goods of dependable purity, quality and strength are sold from licenced premises, by persons who have obtained their personal licences after having a criminal record check, earns taxes for the public purse and does not subsidise organised crime.

Sounds like a good idea.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top