spen666
Well-Known Member
doesn't matter whether he was incited by the post or was not.
He committed the offences for which he was rightly jailed
Last edited:
Riot!
- Thread starter Fab Foodie
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
doesn't matter whether he was incited by the post or was not.
He committed the offences for which he was rightly jailed
glasgowcyclist
Über Member
AuroraSaab
Squire
Remanded without bail, trial in 17 months. Seems a bit harsh but it's within the law so we don't need to worry about it, I guess.
https://enfielddispatch.co.uk/south...disorder-over-attack-on-israeli-weapons-firm/
https://enfielddispatch.co.uk/south...disorder-over-attack-on-israeli-weapons-firm/
spen666
Well-Known Member
No mention of the facts you allege in the article you link to. Indeed the article does not even say anyone was remanded in custody, let alone state what the trial date is.
Indeed the law is very clear, the Custody Time Limit for someone remanded in Custody is 182 days. The lack of a court room or judge to hear a case is not a ground for extending the Custody Time Limit
The law concerning custody time limits is to be found at:
- Section 22 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, as amended ("the Act") [Archbold Chapter 1]
- Prosecution of Offences (CTL) Regulations 1987, as amended ("the Regulations") [Archbold Chapter 3]
- Currently, the Criminal Procedure Rules (October 2015) (and as amended)
AuroraSaab
Squire
Forgot to put the link in X. One of the parent's account of their arrest:
View: https://x.com/Subversivite/status/1847748642414678454
Pretty sure you can hold people on remand without bail until trial, when appropriate of course. Murderer, rapists, violent criminals etc.
View: https://x.com/Subversivite/status/1847748642414678454
Pretty sure you can hold people on remand without bail until trial, when appropriate of course. Murderer, rapists, violent criminals etc.
monkers
Legendary Member
FYI ... the government extended it from 6 to 8 months in September 2020. There are cases where prisoners have been held longer, quite probably unlawfully.
spen666
Well-Known Member
Want a 3rd go?
That link doesn't mention being held on remand without trial for 17 months either.
It does however create a number of factual errors and the author of the petition seems to think its somehow chilling that the CPS and the Home Office have spoken about preventing potential criminal attacks by people.
Or that someone who is deemed an escape risk is woken every hour - they are not. They also seem to think this is some kind of political activity or torture - it is not . If someone is considered a suicide risk, then hourly checks are made on them. This is routine for all those considered at such risk, but does not happen to those considered to be an escape risk
The author of the petition seems to think that its only aggravated burglary and criminal damage. Well Aggravated Burglary can carry life imprisonment, so its not that minor sn offence
Looking at the allegations and the sentencing council guidelines, if proven, the case would be a category 1 harm and high culpability case, given the amount of planning, high value of damage and serious injuries caused to 2 police officers. The sentencing starting point ofr such a matter is 10 years imprisonment
Last edited:
AuroraSaab
Squire
Yes, it does. It's literally right there. It's the young woman's mum posting. You think she'd know.
Seems harsh to me but all those who think the Twitter poster and the guy who killed himself in jail yesterday got all he deserved will no doubt approve of it.
spen666
Well-Known Member
The legislation and the CPS both say limit is 182 days.
Have you got a link to this alleged extension to 8 months?
Again any links to evidence that anyone has been geld longer than the custody time limits lawfully or otherwise.
Or are you just making things up to support your arguments
monkers
Legendary Member
I'm not actually arguing anything. I only intended a friendly update with reference to a revision. I hope this link is good enough for your purposes.
https://www.fairtrials.org/articles...longer-legal-time-limit-while-awaiting-trial/
spen666
Well-Known Member
Fair trials claim is not in accordance with the CPS website or the legislation I linked to earlier.
Now which to believe the organisation that are bound by the CTLs and the Government who set the CTLs, both of whom provide links to support their stance or a random pressure group who don't?
It's hard to make a decision
A little knowledge is dangerous in the wrong hands. A further look at the website you link to makes it clear the extension to 8 months was a temporary measure during COVID and it no longer applies, so as I said correctly, the CTL is 182 days and it is not as you claim 8 months
Last edited:
monkers
Legendary Member
Fair enough. The little knowledge is not dangerous in my hands- I'm not involved, I just remember the news of the adjustment.
I had searched the text of the article for the word 'covid' but it was a null search.
A further/deeper search found this ...
- CTLs starting on or after 28 September 2020 but before 28 June 2021. As a consequence of the Coronavuris pandemic and Custody Time Limits (Coronavirus) Amendment Regulations the 182 day CTL above will be 238 days and the 112 day CTL above will be 168 days. For any charge subject to a CTL before 28 September 2020 (whether the defendant was then n custody or on bail having previously been in custody on that charge) the 182 (or 112) CTL will continue to apply. From 28 June 2021 the CTLs revert to 182 (or 112 days) for new CTLs that start on or after that date. The other (56 and 70 day) CTLs are not affected by these regulations.
Last edited:
spen666
Well-Known Member
The little knowledge you have is very dangerous because it results in you posting false information on here claiming the Custody Time Limit is 8 months, when it is not.
monkers
Legendary Member
Oh give over.
Nobody was harmed. I wasn't giving legal advice, which is something I never do, anyway the issue was quickly resolved.
Even when people are perfectly reasonable to you, you get all combative.
The other day you were talking bollocks about the law pertaining to education, which as it happens I do know something about. Did I say you were dangerous? No. I just said you were incorrect, as you were.
spen666
Well-Known Member
Grow up
I have never said you were dangerous.
I said a little knowledge is dangerous and if you know education, then you would perhaps understand the difference between what I said and what you have made up that you claim I said.
Let's get back to the facts, namely the CTL is 182 days as the CPS, the law , and I say and not 8 months as you claim based on your reading a several years put of date article by a campaign group.