Priorities, Anyone?

This Walter Mitty type allegedly acted out his fantasy by wearing medals to which he is not entitled. Sad; pathetic even. But does it really merit the attention of the police, the CPS, the courts, and the rest of it?

Unless he used his bogus life story to rob someone, shouldn't he just be left to live out the rest of his life as the laughing-stock that he has deservedly become?

The police should file this one under P for Prat and get on with something more important.

This Could Be Interesting

This report suggests that lawyers acting for A.Golfer Esq have obtained an Injunction clamping down on the reporting of certain alleged facts about which this blog has not the slightest opinion, suspicion, knowledge or any other inkling of a sniff.

Subject to contract, without prejudice, terms and conditions apply, as do disclaimers and caveats, instructions and retainers, all inclusive of VAT and Wig Surcharge. Oh yes, plus disbursements too. Your house is probably not at risk. Comments may be recorded for training purposes.

Who wants to bet though, that the whole thing is out there somewhere on the Web as I type this, and will be well and truly in the public domain by, shall we say, Monday?

(Five Minutes Later....)

Found it. Just Google Tiger Woods Injunction, and off you go. Still, with the credit crunch on, m'learned friends need all the money they can get. Christmas is coming, and New Year at Sandy Lane doesn't get any cheaper as years go by.

Luke

Any magistrate will recognise the blank eyes, the slumped shoulders and the dead expression of Luke, the young man I saw this week. When he walked into the dock I had just finished reading a pre-sentence report that was bleak even by the usual standards. Old-school Probation officers could usually identify some chink of light, some possible way forward, some intervention that might, just, with a following wind, give their client a straw to grasp, if the necessary will could be summoned up (as it usually could not). Not so here; Luke's history could serve as a stereotype for any criminology lecturer to draw on:- never seen his father, mother on benefits all her adult life, two elder siblings each with a history of offending. Luke had been in and out of Council 'care' (as it is called without the slightest intended irony) and had first offended when just 12. He has now turned 18, so he falls into the adult offender category. At first his offences were acquisitive for the most part, but in recent years violence has started to appear on his record, as well as one sexual matter that has worrying implications for the future. Probation use sophisticated assessment techniques in these reports, and Luke had the worst set of indicators I have ever seen on the so-called OASYS chart. Drink, drugs, illiteracy, a total lack of any social context for himself, a loathing of the police, and admiration for the more successsful criminals in his age group all featured in the report.
What we sentenced him to is, I'm afraid, neither here nor there. It won't work, because so much damage has been done over the years that sporadic interventions by the courts and weekly meetings with his key worker will make not the slightest dent in the anti-social cloak that he has drawn about himself. The Probation assessment is that he has a 95% chance of becoming a repeat offender and of spending the best years of his life in prison. If anything 95% is on the low side, and I haven't the faintest idea what we can do about it.

Cross Your Fingers, Matey!

The nation will be breathing a sigh of relief that a man who approached Tony Blair's London home with a loaded automatic pistol has been arrested.
Earlier reports said that a passer-by picked up the pistol from the gutter and handed it to one of the Blairs' armed protection officers. In doing so he may well have committed a strict liability offence carrying a minimum sentence of five years' imprisonment. Let us hope that he gets on better than this chap.

Rather Him Than Me

The Anonymous Prosecutor is sticking his neck out and inviting questions.

Go on, have a go.

Later:

There's some good stuff on there. Have a look.

Little Temptations

I am as sure as I can be that my 29,000 colleagues are incorruptible in their day-to-day duties. Even a cynic would have to admit that the practice of sitting three people on a bench makes it all but impossible to suborn the court.

We still need to be careful about the little things, though. A few weeks ago an old friend approached me in the pub to certify a copy document - a simple and routine procedure for any JP. He handed me colour photocopies of two passports - I know both of the holders and I had not the slightest doubt that the copies were fine. "Can I just see the originals?" I enquired. "Oh, they aren't here. But you can sign anyway, can't you?" "Er- no" I said. "But why?" he asked. "You know me and you know these two". "Yes" I said, "but I have to sign that I have compared the originals with the copies, and I haven't". "Come on", he said, "does it matter?" "Well yes it does" I replied. "I kind of promised the Queen that I wouldn't tell fibs, even small ones. So no".
We left it there, and I was reminded of the time that another old pal, who had previously asked me, brought along his renewal form for a shotgun certificate. "But it's blank, Reg" I said. "Don't worry", he replied. "Just sign it and I'll fill it in later".
"No bloody fear" I thought. "Sorry, mate" was what I said, while asking the barmaid for a pen that Reg could use to fill in the form. It took him 15 minutes.

It's Not Just Here Then

I am sometimes accused of being a bit harsh on some of the day to day managerial and operational decisions taken by the police and prosecution authorities. I continue to hold the view that a lot of low-to-medium level policing could be improved by a bit of old-fashioned commonsense management. But look what the Aussies are up to.

Isn't there someone out there with a bit of rank and access to a telephone who can deliver, as forcefully as possible, the message that the police have more important things to worry about?
It reminds me of this nonsense a while ago.

It's the telly, isn't it? How long before somebody gets arrested for something to do with 'Strictly Come X-Factor' or 'I've Got Talent Get Me Out Of Here' or any of the other depressingly popular drivel in the same vein?

Oo-Er Missus!

I have ruffled the occasional feather on the Mags'Association forum (passworded, members only, not too much traffic).

There are a couple of crackers on tonight, viz:-

the clumsy posturing of the Magistrate's blog.

and

Just because the person's a fellow JP doesn't place them above any criticism. Smug, self-satisfied and sanctimonious are but three of the adjectives that spring to mind.

Well, you can't please everyone can you?

Plus Ca Change - One Of A Series

I have just watched BBC4's broadcast of the Nureyev/Fonteyn Romeo and Juliet, to the stunning Prokofiev score.

Okay, it's set in Renaissance Italy, to a tale by an Elizabethan Englishman from what was to become the Black Country (well nearly, anyway) but what struck me in the quiet bits, when I was sent to put the kettle on, was how many of the human follies on display are to be seen in our courts four centuries later. Stupid, pointless blood feuds among young men, their testosterone overload overcoming any common sense they ever had. We worry about knife crime: this lot carried swords and daggers. Perverted ideas of family 'honour' have come back to haunt us in the 21st century.

Every mistake that a human being can make has already been made by someone else - yet we still have to find out the hard way for ourselves. Shakespeare could warn us about most of the pitfalls - if only we were not too proud to listen.

Not As Simple As It Looks

The Policeman's Blog has started to highlight 'mad judges' as it calls them. The latest rant refers to this report. The Judge's sentence is described as 'ludicrous' - but is it?
The woman's offence was utterly despicable. She systematically stole from her aged relative, in as gross a breach of trust as you are likely to find. Reading the report carefully, it seems that she pleaded guilty, and was given a Community Order with 200 hours unpaid work (effectively the maximum on a plea of guilty) as part of a Suspended Sentence Order of 52 weeks' imprisonment. The hearing at which she was ordered to pay £5 was a separate POCA hearing in which the prosecutor told the judge that Price had no assets, and therefore invited him to make a nominal order - which is what he did because he had no alternative, all of the stolen money having been spent.
So let's have a look at the substantive sentence. The culpability and seriousness passed the custody threshold, as most people would agree. There is no guideline for forgery at the moment, but if you look at theft in breach of trust you find at (g) on page 100 that if a custodial sentence is justified consideration should be given to whether it can be suspended.
So it was a tricky one to deal with and the judge dealt with it within the guidelines and within the constraints forced on him by the fact that the defendant was broke. You can argue about whether the sentence should have been suspended, but 'mad'? I don't think so.