After the floods recede near her home
there are tell-tale signs that Heather
Mills may have gone on a long walk to
escape the media.
Hat-Tip to Inside Time
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.
Site Meter
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Old boot
Old boot
After the floods recede near her home
there are tell-tale signs that Heather
Mills may have gone on a long walk to
escape the media.
Hat-Tip to Inside Time
After the floods recede near her home
there are tell-tale signs that Heather
Mills may have gone on a long walk to
escape the media.
Hat-Tip to Inside Time
Richard Branson in difficulty climbing Northern Rock
Richard Branson in difficulty climbing Northern Rock
Leave no stone unturned...
Leave no stone unturned...
Pain in the arse and his dog Rocky
Pain in the arse and his dog Rocky
This still is taken from the Prisons Video Magazine issue 67 Summer 2007. I found it in Inside Time the national newspaper for prisoners November 2007 issue and beneath it is this text:
"The latest edition of PVM, No. 67, now available in your prison, looks at various stories of people readjusting back to normal life. The DVD starts with the story of John Hirst, a notorious lifer who talks about the difficulty of resettling to life 'on the out' after serving 25 years in prison. John also talks about his succesful campaign to win prisoners the vote".
UPDATED photo by Ron
This still is taken from the Prisons Video Magazine issue 67 Summer 2007. I found it in Inside Time the national newspaper for prisoners November 2007 issue and beneath it is this text:
"The latest edition of PVM, No. 67, now available in your prison, looks at various stories of people readjusting back to normal life. The DVD starts with the story of John Hirst, a notorious lifer who talks about the difficulty of resettling to life 'on the out' after serving 25 years in prison. John also talks about his succesful campaign to win prisoners the vote".
UPDATED photo by Ron
Hanging in the balance
Hanging in the balance
Amid diplomatic turmoil between Britain and Russia, one of the world's greatest post-Impressionist masterpieces was finally hung at the Royal Academy in London yesterday.
This raises the question; should the war criminal Tony Blair be hung?
"Russia cancelled the exhibition just before Christmas because it was concerned that its paintings might be seized in London...However, the Russians relented after Britain rushed through laws to guarantee against the seizure of foreign state-owned assets in this country".
Isn't it marvellous how Britain can rush through laws for the sake of Russian paintings, and yet take ages and has still not passed laws to give convicted prisoners the right to vote?
Amid diplomatic turmoil between Britain and Russia, one of the world's greatest post-Impressionist masterpieces was finally hung at the Royal Academy in London yesterday.
This raises the question; should the war criminal Tony Blair be hung?
"Russia cancelled the exhibition just before Christmas because it was concerned that its paintings might be seized in London...However, the Russians relented after Britain rushed through laws to guarantee against the seizure of foreign state-owned assets in this country".
Isn't it marvellous how Britain can rush through laws for the sake of Russian paintings, and yet take ages and has still not passed laws to give convicted prisoners the right to vote?
Friday, January 18, 2008
A rant and rave
A rant and rave
Last night, or to be exact 5 minutes into this morning, I started to watch Nightwatch - Emergency on ITV, which I had seen advertised on Teletext, and it was confirmed what I was watching when the title came up. Therefore, what was the point of having the spare prick at a wedding? Namely, "Hi. I'm Steve Scott. Your watching Nightwatch". Am I really? Well, I never! He droned on "And coming up on this week's programme...". Doesn't ITV think I can find out by myself what's coming up by my watching the programme without the need for this fucking idiot getting paid for stating the obvious? I know that it has been said that people's attention span is only 8 minutes, nevetherless, after 15 minutes the irritating sod is back telling me what I have just been watching for the last 15 minutes, recapping, and what's coming up after the break and to stay tuned in. There was just 1 advert advertising an ITV programme and then it was de ja vue, or Groundhog Day, "Hi. I'm Steve Scott" he then recaps again what I had been watching in the first 15 minutes, in case I had forgotten this and his recap during the 1 minute interval, and tells me again what is coming up in part 2. Grrrrhhh!
Half of the programme featured the coming and goings of an A&E department in a Birmingham hospital and my mind wandered to Mousie and my admiration for her and the work that she does in the front line. I already knew that the human bite is worse than a dog's (Park Rangers take note) but I learned that even a cat's bite is worse than a dog's. Rocky only picks up 3rd prize! One chap (not bitten) lost the tip of his thumb and surgeons spent 14 hours grafting it back on, only for him to go back into the operating theatre the next day to have it removed again, and a bit more besides, because it had not worked out, and to stop infection.
The other half of the programme featured a Fire and Rescue department in Bristol Temple Meads. I was interested to learn that when firemen start the job they are put on probation for 2 years. I think that the Criminal Justice System is in need of reform because usually one has to commit a criminal offence to be put on 2 years probation! Who the fuck gave planning permission for high rise blocks of flats when even the extendible ladder failed to reach the 12th floor let alone the 15th floor? And of course, the lift was out of action! I shared the frustration and annoyance expressed by the firemen at the 10 call outs per night to car fires started by car thieves to destroy evidence; and the 6 call outs every night to students halls of residence, when 4 tenders have to attend, because the bloody idiots set off the fire alarms as a prank. Why doesn't the Dean of the university get a grip of this madness?
"I'm Steve Scott. You have been watching...". I would dearly like to see a remake of The Wickerman, this time starring Steve Scott, and for something seriously to go wrong with the pyrotechnics, and all the Fire and Rescue engines to be out on call tending car fires and student halls of residence. Sorry, Steve, burn in hell! Alternatively, get a real job!
Last night, or to be exact 5 minutes into this morning, I started to watch Nightwatch - Emergency on ITV, which I had seen advertised on Teletext, and it was confirmed what I was watching when the title came up. Therefore, what was the point of having the spare prick at a wedding? Namely, "Hi. I'm Steve Scott. Your watching Nightwatch". Am I really? Well, I never! He droned on "And coming up on this week's programme...". Doesn't ITV think I can find out by myself what's coming up by my watching the programme without the need for this fucking idiot getting paid for stating the obvious? I know that it has been said that people's attention span is only 8 minutes, nevetherless, after 15 minutes the irritating sod is back telling me what I have just been watching for the last 15 minutes, recapping, and what's coming up after the break and to stay tuned in. There was just 1 advert advertising an ITV programme and then it was de ja vue, or Groundhog Day, "Hi. I'm Steve Scott" he then recaps again what I had been watching in the first 15 minutes, in case I had forgotten this and his recap during the 1 minute interval, and tells me again what is coming up in part 2. Grrrrhhh!
Half of the programme featured the coming and goings of an A&E department in a Birmingham hospital and my mind wandered to Mousie and my admiration for her and the work that she does in the front line. I already knew that the human bite is worse than a dog's (Park Rangers take note) but I learned that even a cat's bite is worse than a dog's. Rocky only picks up 3rd prize! One chap (not bitten) lost the tip of his thumb and surgeons spent 14 hours grafting it back on, only for him to go back into the operating theatre the next day to have it removed again, and a bit more besides, because it had not worked out, and to stop infection.
The other half of the programme featured a Fire and Rescue department in Bristol Temple Meads. I was interested to learn that when firemen start the job they are put on probation for 2 years. I think that the Criminal Justice System is in need of reform because usually one has to commit a criminal offence to be put on 2 years probation! Who the fuck gave planning permission for high rise blocks of flats when even the extendible ladder failed to reach the 12th floor let alone the 15th floor? And of course, the lift was out of action! I shared the frustration and annoyance expressed by the firemen at the 10 call outs per night to car fires started by car thieves to destroy evidence; and the 6 call outs every night to students halls of residence, when 4 tenders have to attend, because the bloody idiots set off the fire alarms as a prank. Why doesn't the Dean of the university get a grip of this madness?
"I'm Steve Scott. You have been watching...". I would dearly like to see a remake of The Wickerman, this time starring Steve Scott, and for something seriously to go wrong with the pyrotechnics, and all the Fire and Rescue engines to be out on call tending car fires and student halls of residence. Sorry, Steve, burn in hell! Alternatively, get a real job!
Chairman Brown in Beijing
Chairman Brown in Beijing
As the prime minister sets out his market stall and sells Britishness to China, is he guilty of selling out on human rights issues?
Yes.
China is still failing (in the words of Amnesty's Kate Allen) "to honour the promises it made, when bidding for the Olympics, to improve human rights. It still locks up dissidents, shuts down opposition websites and executes more people every year than the rest of the world put together".
As the prime minister sets out his market stall and sells Britishness to China, is he guilty of selling out on human rights issues?
Yes.
China is still failing (in the words of Amnesty's Kate Allen) "to honour the promises it made, when bidding for the Olympics, to improve human rights. It still locks up dissidents, shuts down opposition websites and executes more people every year than the rest of the world put together".
YouTube's dancing prisoners denied new licence to thrill
YouTube's dancing prisoners denied new licence to thrill
Dance all you want behind locked doors, but you aint gonna dance in the street...
Dance all you want behind locked doors, but you aint gonna dance in the street...
The silly season
The silly season
Labour: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".
Police response: Police cast as villains in panto row
An amateur dramatics group staging a pantomime version of Pirates of the Caribbean in Carnon Downs, Cornwall, has been told by police to keep two plastic swords and a pop-gun under lock and key whenever the props are not being used on stage. Elaine Gummow, the co-director, said that to satisfy health and safety regulations she had to inform the local constabulary if she planned to move the offending items. She added: “It all seems a bit ridiculous – we had to tell police we had ‘no malicious intent’. There are heavier things on stage that can cause injury than plastic swords.”
Labour: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".
Police response: Police cast as villains in panto row
An amateur dramatics group staging a pantomime version of Pirates of the Caribbean in Carnon Downs, Cornwall, has been told by police to keep two plastic swords and a pop-gun under lock and key whenever the props are not being used on stage. Elaine Gummow, the co-director, said that to satisfy health and safety regulations she had to inform the local constabulary if she planned to move the offending items. She added: “It all seems a bit ridiculous – we had to tell police we had ‘no malicious intent’. There are heavier things on stage that can cause injury than plastic swords.”
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Pigs can fly
Pigs can fly
Prince William gets no preferential treatment here.
You mean just like Cornet Wales not having to go to war in Iraq?
As a viewer on BBC 1 Look North pointed out, it does help when Grandma owns the Flying Club!
Flying Officer Wales "had the comforting presence of his instructor by his side". I would not call that flying solo.
Would the RAF allow the media in for every other Flying Officer's "solo" flight?
Police arrest innocent Rocky and let guilty paedophile free
Police arrest innocent Rocky and let guilty paedophile free
If the police did not busy themselves with falsely arresting and imprisoning innocent dog walkers, then perhaps they would not have released the paedophile on their most wanted list.
UPDATE: Released paedophile is arrested
A wanted paedophile who was mistakenly released by a police force has been arrested in Sussex.
If the police did not busy themselves with falsely arresting and imprisoning innocent dog walkers, then perhaps they would not have released the paedophile on their most wanted list.
UPDATE: Released paedophile is arrested
A wanted paedophile who was mistakenly released by a police force has been arrested in Sussex.
The cost to the taxpayer of MPs representing their own interests
The cost to the taxpayer of MPs representing their own interests
I think it is incredible that they work for us and yet they vote themselves their own pay rises. I recall when Gordon Brown was officially chancellor (he still is unofficially because Darling is just a puppet), he insisted that the public sector kept pay rises below the rate of inflation. And yet, a so-called independent review body has recommended that MPs should get above inflation rate pay increases for the next 3 years.
Why does everybody else have to pay living costs out of their wage or benefits and yet MPs receive over £20,000 above their wage for living costs?
Who else can claim expenses and yet not produce any receipts to justify the allowance?
Lesbian soldier Kerry Fletcher wins case
Lesbian soldier Kerry Fletcher wins case
A lesbian soldier who endured lewd sexual innuendo from a senior staff sergeant who claimed he could "turn her straight" could win compensation of more than £400,000, after winning her case against the Ministry of Defence.
Why hasn't the senior staff sergeant involved been named and shamed and demoted?
More to the point, why are soldiers who are seriously injured in Iraq awarded a mere pittance in comparison?
Fair trial groups attack EU prison plan
Fair trial groups attack EU prison plan
Fair trial campaigners have given warning that there will be miscarriages of justice under European Union plans to hand over Britons tried and convicted in absentia by foreign courts.
Kafka is alive and well and living in Europe...
Fair trial campaigners have given warning that there will be miscarriages of justice under European Union plans to hand over Britons tried and convicted in absentia by foreign courts.
Kafka is alive and well and living in Europe...
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Man's best friend or dangerous dog?
Man's best friend or dangerous dog?
According to Wikipedia:
"The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is a piece of UK legislation that was introduced in response to various incidents of serious injury or death resulting from attacks by aggressive and uncontrolled dogs, particularly on children. These incidents received heavy tabloid attention, causing widespread public concern over the keeping of dangerous dogs and a resulting legislative response".
I think it is fair to say that the Act is more in keeping with politicians displaying knee-jerk reactions rather than employing their thought processes. Nevertheless, I have been charged under section 3(1):
"3 Keeping dogs under proper control
(1) If a dog is dangerously out of control in a public place—
(a) the owner; and
(b) if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog,
is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person, an aggravated offence, under this subsection".
Section 10 provides an interpretation:
"10(3) For the purposes of this Act a dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person, whether or not it actually does so, but references to a dog injuring a person or there being grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so do not include references to any case in which the dog is being used for a lawful purpose by a constable or a person in the service of the Crown".
The key words here are "reasonable apprehension". For example, according to Wikipedia:
"In England and Wales, an assault consists of a person intentionally or recklessly causing another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence".
Therefore, it is the fear of (mental) rather than the actual physical contact which constitutes the offence. In this sense, it is a "thought crime".
Having the benefit of seeing how C*** W*****, the Park Ranger, behaves and having read his police statement, in my view, his apprehension is not reasonable. I suspect it is neurotic. If that is the case, then it is his problem and not mine.
However, there is another element to this whole affair. Another Park Ranger called Richard decided to start picking on me whilst I was walking my dog Rocky in Pearson Park in Hull. Eventually, I complained to the relevant council department and this Richard was the subject of a disciplinary hearing and received a reprimand. From that point on he left me alone. Shortly thereafter, two other Park Rangers, one of whom is C*** W*****, began picking on me. I find this to be too much of a coincidence. In prison it is common practice when a prisoner and a prison officer come into conflict for that prison officer to "mark his card", and then he finds that he is targeted by other prison officers for rough treatment.
It may be that I am not as responsible a dog owner as I could and/or should be. For example, even though animal charities may disagree about the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, "Both charities do agree that all dog owners should be responsible and keep their animals on leads or under close supervision in public places". I don't usually keep Rocky on his lead accept when near or crossing busy roads. Some may argue that if Rocky is walking about 50 yards away from me then that is not close supervision. However, the case may not rest on that at all. If I was the Crown Prosecution Service lawyer I might have doubts about the credibility of their star witness and the reliability of his evidence.
According to Wikipedia:
"The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is a piece of UK legislation that was introduced in response to various incidents of serious injury or death resulting from attacks by aggressive and uncontrolled dogs, particularly on children. These incidents received heavy tabloid attention, causing widespread public concern over the keeping of dangerous dogs and a resulting legislative response".
I think it is fair to say that the Act is more in keeping with politicians displaying knee-jerk reactions rather than employing their thought processes. Nevertheless, I have been charged under section 3(1):
"3 Keeping dogs under proper control
(1) If a dog is dangerously out of control in a public place—
(a) the owner; and
(b) if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog,
is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person, an aggravated offence, under this subsection".
Section 10 provides an interpretation:
"10(3) For the purposes of this Act a dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person, whether or not it actually does so, but references to a dog injuring a person or there being grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so do not include references to any case in which the dog is being used for a lawful purpose by a constable or a person in the service of the Crown".
The key words here are "reasonable apprehension". For example, according to Wikipedia:
"In England and Wales, an assault consists of a person intentionally or recklessly causing another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence".
Therefore, it is the fear of (mental) rather than the actual physical contact which constitutes the offence. In this sense, it is a "thought crime".
Having the benefit of seeing how C*** W*****, the Park Ranger, behaves and having read his police statement, in my view, his apprehension is not reasonable. I suspect it is neurotic. If that is the case, then it is his problem and not mine.
However, there is another element to this whole affair. Another Park Ranger called Richard decided to start picking on me whilst I was walking my dog Rocky in Pearson Park in Hull. Eventually, I complained to the relevant council department and this Richard was the subject of a disciplinary hearing and received a reprimand. From that point on he left me alone. Shortly thereafter, two other Park Rangers, one of whom is C*** W*****, began picking on me. I find this to be too much of a coincidence. In prison it is common practice when a prisoner and a prison officer come into conflict for that prison officer to "mark his card", and then he finds that he is targeted by other prison officers for rough treatment.
It may be that I am not as responsible a dog owner as I could and/or should be. For example, even though animal charities may disagree about the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, "Both charities do agree that all dog owners should be responsible and keep their animals on leads or under close supervision in public places". I don't usually keep Rocky on his lead accept when near or crossing busy roads. Some may argue that if Rocky is walking about 50 yards away from me then that is not close supervision. However, the case may not rest on that at all. If I was the Crown Prosecution Service lawyer I might have doubts about the credibility of their star witness and the reliability of his evidence.
Author's murder trial to be held in secret
Author's murder trial to be held in secret
"A judge has ruled that parts of a murder trial must take place in secret next week in order to protect national security".
WTF?
Why does the Crown using the Crown Prosecution Service wish to prevent the public from hearing the defendant's defence to the charge? It would appear that there is something not straightforward about this case. As I understand it, the defendant is seeking to argue that British Intelligence is somehow implicated in the murder and that he is being fitted up for the crime. In my view, if there was no smoke without fire why would the CPS bother even to seek the gagging order in the first place? And, secondly, threaten the judge that if he did not grant the secret trial then they would be forced to drop the prosecution. What does Wang Yam know that the State does not wish the public to discover?
"A judge has ruled that parts of a murder trial must take place in secret next week in order to protect national security".
WTF?
Why does the Crown using the Crown Prosecution Service wish to prevent the public from hearing the defendant's defence to the charge? It would appear that there is something not straightforward about this case. As I understand it, the defendant is seeking to argue that British Intelligence is somehow implicated in the murder and that he is being fitted up for the crime. In my view, if there was no smoke without fire why would the CPS bother even to seek the gagging order in the first place? And, secondly, threaten the judge that if he did not grant the secret trial then they would be forced to drop the prosecution. What does Wang Yam know that the State does not wish the public to discover?
The silence of the lamb
The silence of the lamb
It's a slow news day. The Daily Telegraph reports Girl vanishes near Madeleine McCann site. I would hardly call a distance of 120 miles "near". But that has not stopped Metodo 3, the private detective agency employed by the McCanns, from trying to create a link to Madeleine's disappearance, like the bumbling Inspector Clouseau played by Peter Sellars in the Pink Panther films. Given that this little girl went missing on Sunday, it has only just reached the British media on Wednesday, without all the fanfare we witnessed at the time Madeleine disappeared. And only then because the media hungry McCanns will stop at nothing, even jumping on someone else's bandwagon, as they try and sell us the "we have done nothing wrong line".
It's a slow news day. The Daily Telegraph reports Girl vanishes near Madeleine McCann site. I would hardly call a distance of 120 miles "near". But that has not stopped Metodo 3, the private detective agency employed by the McCanns, from trying to create a link to Madeleine's disappearance, like the bumbling Inspector Clouseau played by Peter Sellars in the Pink Panther films. Given that this little girl went missing on Sunday, it has only just reached the British media on Wednesday, without all the fanfare we witnessed at the time Madeleine disappeared. And only then because the media hungry McCanns will stop at nothing, even jumping on someone else's bandwagon, as they try and sell us the "we have done nothing wrong line".
My bonnie lies over the ocean (but not about her age)
My bonnie lies over the ocean (but not about her age)
Old bloggers never die they just keep blogging on. Ask Gingersnaps, she should know having just reached the ripe old age of 41...
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
DJ Andy Kershaw jailed over restraining order
DJ Andy Kershaw jailed over restraining order
By Nigel Bunyan
Last Updated: 7:12pm GMT 15/01/2008
Andy Kershaw, the BBC radio presenter, has begun a three-month prison sentence after being warned that his life was turning into a "Greek tragedy".
Kershaw, 48, was jailed on the Isle of Man for breaking a restraining order taken out by his ex-girlfriend after he pestered both her and the new man in her life. As he passed sentence, the High Bailiff said Kershaw seemed "hell-bent" on destroying himself.
The Radio 3 presenter admitted being "menacing and provocative" when approaching Juliette Banner, the mother of his two children, and Jim Imrie, a Glasgow-based prison officer.
Passing sentence, High Sheriff Michael Moyle told Kershaw that previous warnings about his behaviour appeared to have fallen on "deaf ears".
He went on: "You seem hell bent on destroying yourself and you do not seem to appreciate that the author of your destruction is yourself.
"I genuinely regret that you, by your actions, have brought this state of affairs to pass. I regret that I feel I have no obligation other than to impose custody."
The High Sheriff added: "You are going to drive a wedge between yourself and your children if you carry on in this way".
Kershaw, who is fighting a dependency on alcohol, replied: "On the contrary, sir, my children have spent the last two weekends with me. They have voted with their feet".
He then blew a kiss to his new girlfriend, Catherine Turner, 42, before being led away to begin his sentence at the island's only prison.
Kershaw, who lives on the seafront at Peel, escaped with a three-month suspended prison term the last time he appeared at the Courts of Justice in Douglas last October.
On that occasion he pleaded guilty to harassing Miss Banner by banging drunkenly on her front door and shouting at both her and Mr Imrie. However, by the time he was sentenced he had already spent six nights in prison.
His latest breach came on November 2 when he approached the couple as they went for coffee at Peel Breakwater. He glared at them before circling them and walking "in front of them backwards", the court was told.
Kershaw also admitted sending his children text messages that referred to their mother and her boyfriend in an "abusing" manner.
He further admitted being drunk and disorderly outside Peel police station on November 7. He called one officer "an idiot".
The High Bailiff ordered him to complete the earlier three-month sentence but said it would run concurrently.
He also ordered that the restraining order against him should remain in place. This bans him from going within 50 yards of the couple's new home on the island.
Nigel Cordwell, defending, had earlier told the court that Kershaw was "devastated" to find himself "in this humiliating situation". He would accept "stoically" any decision to imprison him.
Mr Cordwell said the dispute between his client and Miss Banner centred on the issue of access to their children. However, progress was now being made in this area.
Kershaw's latest fall from grace comes three months after he spoke exclusively to the Daily Telegraph of his "nightmarish" problems.
He admitted that his long-term relationship with Miss Banner had been blighted by a number of sexual infidelities.
His ex-girlfriend learned of these as the couple unloaded their belongings following their move from Crouch End, north London, in April 2006.
"She found a text from someone I'd had a one-night stand with 12 months earlier," he said. "It meant nothing, and I was still desperately in love with Juliette, but for her it was the last straw."
The couple went briefly to Relate, the relationship counselling service, but 15 months ago Miss Banner moved out, taking the children with her. Kershaw's isolation was compounded when she forged a relationship with Mr Imrie and set up home with him.
Day in court
Day in court
Here is the weather forecast. It was pissing it down this morning in Hull and there was a wind. Naturally, my umbrella costing a £1 from the Pound Shop blew inside out and parted from the stem before I had even reached the magistrates court. I arrived at 9.30am as per my instructions from Payne and Payne solicitors. Someone representing the firm called me into an office at 10.20am, and I am unsure whether he sacked me or I sacked him, in any event I was out of the office at 10.21am. I approached the clerk and informed her that I was now representing myself and was ushered straight into Court Number 1. The magistrate was a throwback from the 18th or 19th century, patronage and all that crap. The two charges were read out:
1) Owner allow dog out of control to cause injury...Contrary to Section 3(1) and (4) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991;
2) Section 4 words/behaviour - fear unlawful violence...Contrary to Section 4(1) and (4) of the Public Order Act 1986.
I entered pleas of not guilty on both counts. I elected to go for the Crown Court and trial by jury on the first count, and the second charge was dropped by the prosecution. The case was adjourned until 26 February 2008. I was out of there by 10.30am.
The title is incorrect as it was not really a day in court, more like 10 minutes. Still, it is a daunting procedure and can cause stress. I think it is indicative of how weak the charge against me was that it was first downgraded from assault to threatening behaviour before being dropped altogether as soon as I indicated that I intended to defend my innocence rather than accept a guilty plea to speed things up.
Although the wording of the remaining charge refers to the owner, in effect it will be Rocky who is on trial. I have employed Ruth Bundy & Co, Leeds, to represent Rocky. Payne and Payne, Hull, will not now be on my Christmas Card list.
And if anybody is in any doubt, or has forgotten, Rocky is innocent ok?
Here is the weather forecast. It was pissing it down this morning in Hull and there was a wind. Naturally, my umbrella costing a £1 from the Pound Shop blew inside out and parted from the stem before I had even reached the magistrates court. I arrived at 9.30am as per my instructions from Payne and Payne solicitors. Someone representing the firm called me into an office at 10.20am, and I am unsure whether he sacked me or I sacked him, in any event I was out of the office at 10.21am. I approached the clerk and informed her that I was now representing myself and was ushered straight into Court Number 1. The magistrate was a throwback from the 18th or 19th century, patronage and all that crap. The two charges were read out:
1) Owner allow dog out of control to cause injury...Contrary to Section 3(1) and (4) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991;
2) Section 4 words/behaviour - fear unlawful violence...Contrary to Section 4(1) and (4) of the Public Order Act 1986.
I entered pleas of not guilty on both counts. I elected to go for the Crown Court and trial by jury on the first count, and the second charge was dropped by the prosecution. The case was adjourned until 26 February 2008. I was out of there by 10.30am.
The title is incorrect as it was not really a day in court, more like 10 minutes. Still, it is a daunting procedure and can cause stress. I think it is indicative of how weak the charge against me was that it was first downgraded from assault to threatening behaviour before being dropped altogether as soon as I indicated that I intended to defend my innocence rather than accept a guilty plea to speed things up.
Although the wording of the remaining charge refers to the owner, in effect it will be Rocky who is on trial. I have employed Ruth Bundy & Co, Leeds, to represent Rocky. Payne and Payne, Hull, will not now be on my Christmas Card list.
And if anybody is in any doubt, or has forgotten, Rocky is innocent ok?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)