R v Hirst SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENCE
THE QUEEN
v
JOHN HIRST
HULL MAGISTRATES COURT
ABUSE OF PROCESS
SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENCE
The Issues
1. The issues for determination by the court are whether it would be an abuse of the courts process to allow the prosecution of JOHN HIRST to continue.
2. Firstly, the Defence alleges that a number of park keepers in Pearson Park found out about the Defendant’s past and resented his using the park, and engaged in a vendetta against him.
3. Secondly, the Defence alleges that the CPS does not have the public power to prosecute a civil matter in a civil court.
4. The Defendant now contends that by reason of the conduct of the public authorities, that is, the park keepers, there is no statutory authority for public authority employees to pursue a private vendetta against a member of the public. And the Attorney General and the CPS, it would be an abuse of the process of the court to allow the prosecution to continue; and he asks the court to stay the prosecution without consideration of the evidence to prevent such alleged abuse.
Authorities Cited
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
S.6 (1) Human Rights Act 1998.
S.2 of the Dogs Act 1871
S.3 (2) (g) Prosecution of Offenders Act 1985
Legal Guidance prepared by the Crown Prosecution Service to guide Crown Prosecutors and Designated Caseworkers in making decisions in cases.
Hansard
n.b. The case is tomorrow
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
1 comment:
Looks good. Fingers crossed here. My Ted's just glanced up and said, 'Good luck, mate.'
Post a Comment