Page 3 of 4

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:52 am
by atticus
Indeed, there is little excuse for "going on what is reported".

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 5:22 pm
by diy
great discussion with some good logical arguments presented. Makes a lot of sense.

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 5:28 pm
by shootist
Maz JP wrote:
shootist wrote:. Nice that ACPO and CPS can conspire together to remove the right to trial by jury without needing to bother parliament.


I haven't sat for a few days; has Parliament removed the right for people to elect trial at a Crown Court in that period?


So, no.

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 5:45 pm
by Maz JP
Excellent.

In that case, I can assume that for Either Way offences people can still elect to be tried by a jury.

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 6:31 pm
by shootist
Maz JP wrote:Excellent.

In that case, I can assume that for Either Way offences people can still elect to be tried by a jury.


OK, an explanation is due, I suppose.

An assault which resulted in, say, a broken nose, a black eye, a missing tooth, or even just a bruise, would all have been charged with S.47, ABH. Straightforward. The problem, as it was perceived, that the defendant could elect trial, and trials cost money. For at least 11 years, that was exactly the charge that was brought for such injuries, and in a busy and violent city centre beat I made many such charges.

Add to it that a thin case that might be worth a punt in magistrates would not make it past a jury so it would be NFA'd. So, along comes Common Assault, contrary to section 39 Criminal Justice Act 1988. A summary only offence. I would be very surprised indeed if you have not sat to judge an assault case where such 'minor' injuries were the subject of a S.39 charge instead of the S.47 they clearly are. There was even, IIRC, a decided case that injuries that fit the S.47 definition but a S.39 charge was used, can be compensated by a magistrates court to the same level as a S.47.

CPS and ACPO got together to decide these charging standards. Not a single MP was disturbed from their slumbers to achieve this, but for what was one of the most common charges to be brought for an act of violence, a right to elect trial in front of a jury of their peers that had existed for over a hundred years, the majority of such alleged offenders lost that right.

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 7:11 pm
by atticus
This case was before a judge. Had the plea not been guilty, a jury too.

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 7:14 pm
by shootist
atticus wrote:This case was before a judge. Had the plea not been guilty, a jury too.


Indeed. But, my original point was made in response to a generalisation about the offence of ABH made by DLS and was not specific to the OP.

Re-reading the article, there could have been a good case for a charge of making threats to kill, which carries ten years as opposed to the five of ABH.

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 10:42 pm
by Hairyloon
atticus wrote:Perfect?


Pathetic?

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 8:51 am
by Russell
Yes that was the word I was trying to spell. The sentence was Pathetic.

Re: 2 years for kidnap and attempted murder?

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 9:18 am
by atticus
I would not be that harsh on your writing.