Huddersfield child sex inquiry

Robinson was locked up after being found guilty of contempt. He was released on appeal and has been on bail since. They were committed to trial at a hearing and the magistrates obviously felt that none of the well-defined exclusions to the automatic right to bail applied. They hadn't at that time been found guilty of any offence. So they got bail.

Robinson does seem to appeal to the hard of thinking.

It takes a truly special mind to be protesting at these events in such a way that even the outraged think "you fucking idiot".

But he managed it.
 
As an actuary said to a contractor I worked with, having tried to explain something 3 times; I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you
Good quote, just completely the wrong way around in my experience. A specialist in a field usually knows more than someone who simply theorises about it.
 
Surely propensity to evade the law should be a consideration? Flight risk is a significant issue.
I'm not a lawyer but looking at the relevant considerations suggest that to be refused bail in an offence that would be expected to result in a summary custodial sentence you would either have to:
  • have committed a previous serious offence.
  • have previously failed to surrender when on bail.
  • be on bail for another offence at the time the subsequent offence was committed.
  • be considered at risk of harming an associated third-party.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/bail
 
I'm not a lawyer but looking at the relevant considerations suggest that to be refused bail in an offence that would be expected to result in a summary custodial sentence you would either have to:
  • have committed a previous serious offence.
  • have previously failed to surrender when on bail.
  • be on bail for another offence at the time the subsequent offence was committed.
  • be considered at risk of harming an associated third-party.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/bail
I accept it probably isn't a factor in granting bail, but I think it should be. It is one of the few legal areas I think the US has it right. Bounty hunters would make life interesting too.
 
No I am suggesting nothing of the sort,what I am pointing out is mistakes can be made even in the era of dna science,by all means hand out long or life sentences but I don't see apart from my point above how killing other people furthers humanity or proves those who advocate it any better than those convicted.

Costs a fucking bomb mate. Money matters more than life to the justice system.
 
With respect, that’s absolute shit.
If that is the case why does anyone talking about ethnic issues feel they are treading on eggshells. Any discussion is always started with I am not a racist but. In this case the authorities were reluctant to investigate for fear of stirring up racial tensions. Not my words, but those of Mark Eastam on the BBC,hardly the bastion of right wing extremism. You see it on the TV in those police chases where they are reluctant to persue cars in to a Gypsy encampment.
 
Last edited:

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.