Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Thoughts for this forum's legal fraternity.

  1. #1
    Gardening Leave
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,186

    Default Thoughts for this forum's legal fraternity.

    Thi issue concerns secret justice; I will quote verbatim what the judge said: District judge Nigel Cadbury, addressing Mr G, said that there was nothing unusual about this case 'except who you are'. The judge continued, 'Of course, it is because of who you are that you've put a lot of people to a lot of trouble in the past few days'. The judge also refused a request from the press to be allowed to name the defendant. (Mr G, was the defendant.)


    The case was dealt with by Telford Magistrates Court, on Friday January 20th. 2012. The charge against Mr G,, aged 29 years, was driving a military van while twice over the legal limit. He was found guilty and find 520; disqualified for twenty-months. In addition he must pay 85. court costs, and 15, victim surcharge. He was also ordered to pay 400, compensation to a Mr and Mrs Bailey for extensive damage to their home when Mr G, crashed into it at 2.40am. The Baileys' say that they have been denied justice. Their home suffered up to 40,000 in structural damage and items stored in their garage, but they cannot be told the name of the convicted criminal who inflicted that harm upon them. It was said in court that the damage to the house might be paid by Mr G's employers. We presume that Mr G's employer was/is the military, but that wasn't actually said. He may have been a civilian employee, a serviceman, a 'trainee' from overseas, someone entitled to diplomatic immunity; the list could be endless. What we can say was that he was lawfully entitled to drive the vehicle, and only his alcohol level disqualified him at the time of the accident. He was describede as a first time offender and an experienced driver. 'He has passed more tests than most people could imagine and has qualifications for driving vehicles such as HGVs', said his defence counsel.

    Supposing that this defendant was a member of the Royal family; would that entitle him to anonymity? I very much doubt it. Could the driver be from a strict 'no drinking' culture from overseas? Could be, and it could provoke political repercussions? Not impossible, but it may do. If diplomatic immuinty was a factor, almost certainly it would not have been brought to court in the first place. I offer no prizes for the best answer, but if some get lost on their intellectual mental excursions, we cannot guarantee to come and find you.

  2. #2
    Moderator Aardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Warks
    Posts
    11,547

    Default

    I suspect that his rank or title is not Mr.

    Other than the security of our state I see no reason for anonymity.

  3. #3
    Gardening Leave
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aardvark View Post
    I suspect that his rank or title is not Mr.

    Other than the security of our state I see no reason for anonymity.
    Aardvark: I agree with you Paul, but the offence, as the judge admitted, was unexceptional; serious, certainly, but without knowing the full story, granting him anonymity had little justification. I wonder why the press were so easily pacified? I wonder if our former p/t policeman cum French polisher would be willing to 'visit Police stations' and bring their attention to the Magna Carta? Should the Magna Carta not be of help, what is Mark Bonham Carter doing these days? I've just checked and I see that he has died. I don't mind reasonable excuses like that for inaction.

  4. #4
    Trusted Member BCG Jason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The South
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    GC to me the interesting point is how will the home owners get compensated. Insurers do not like to pay and have investigators. It will be interesting if they argue without knowing the name of the person driving they refuse to cover the damage. Surely that would lead to a disclosure of sorts?
    UK Column Live For real alternative news

  5. #5
    Gardening Leave
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BCG Jason View Post
    GC to me the interesting point is how will the home owners get compensated. Insurers do not like to pay and have investigators. It will be interesting if they argue without knowing the name of the person driving they refuse to cover the damage. Surely that would lead to a disclosure of sorts?
    BCG Jason: I am certain that the home owners will/have been compensated. There will be account number something or other from which payments can be drawn. The system is very smooth; as Bertrand Russell argued, British toleration is founded on an Establishment which is certain that it can impose its will in times of difficulties.

  6. #6
    Trusted Member BCG Jason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The South
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    That would not surprise me either.
    UK Column Live For real alternative news

  7. #7
    Trusted Member Road_Hog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Warwickshire
    Posts
    10,670

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier View Post
    Supposing that this defendant was a member of the Royal family; would that entitle him to anonymity? I very much doubt it. Could the driver be from a strict 'no drinking' culture from overseas? Could be, and it could provoke political repercussions? Not impossible, but it may do. If diplomatic immuinty was a factor, almost certainly it would not have been brought to court in the first place. I offer no prizes for the best answer, but if some get lost on their intellectual mental excursions, we cannot guarantee to come and find you.
    3 minutes with Google was enough. As is always the way, the OP left some vital clues missing from his post. So, off to find the original article or at least a full article.

    We find this.

    http://www.herefordshirejournals.com...ive-defendant/

    The vital clue is that it is a Hereford based man (Aardy is probably already there).

    Do another search on the article and spot the first comment on the article.

    http://www.herefordtimes.com/news/94..._his_identity/

    The link provided in this comment seems to confirm my suspicions.

    http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/ho...l#.T3GRMuV_7ZA

    A quick click on the link in that article and,

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...y-smashed.html

  8. #8

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •