Air Rage case thrown out
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Rage case thrown out
Report in today's Derry Journal
Two Derry men accused of behaving recklessly on an aircraft walked free from court in Liverpool yesterday.
John Harkin (32) of Little Diamond and Seamus McDermott (31) of Kular Court were arrested following an alleged disturbance on an Easyjet flight from Belfast International to John Lennon airport in Liverpool on May 7
The pair appeared beforeLiverpool magistrates court yesterday for the case to be committed to the Crown Court.
Crown prosecutors did not have the correct paperwork and asked for a two week adjournment, but the magistrate chose to discharge the case.
The men were told that they could be called back to court at a future date if the Crown Proseecution Service applied to re-open the case.
----------
What's going on here?
Two Derry men accused of behaving recklessly on an aircraft walked free from court in Liverpool yesterday.
John Harkin (32) of Little Diamond and Seamus McDermott (31) of Kular Court were arrested following an alleged disturbance on an Easyjet flight from Belfast International to John Lennon airport in Liverpool on May 7
The pair appeared beforeLiverpool magistrates court yesterday for the case to be committed to the Crown Court.
Crown prosecutors did not have the correct paperwork and asked for a two week adjournment, but the magistrate chose to discharge the case.
The men were told that they could be called back to court at a future date if the Crown Proseecution Service applied to re-open the case.
----------
What's going on here?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, you were right on the first bit..sheer incompatence, but then thats been the CPS since they started. As for understaffed, yes they are, but would you work for the CPS and get paid peanuts when you make much more elsewhere...
Should dispose of the service and go back to Police prosecutions, at least the officer in case had a vested interest then!
Should dispose of the service and go back to Police prosecutions, at least the officer in case had a vested interest then!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BJCC - agree wholeheartedly with your response. Sheer incompetence of the highest order, thank god they dont fly airplanes. Daysleeper - with a defence like that do you have relatives in government?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Finding Out on 121.50
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is very hard to "do the Court Circuit" and always have the right paperwork. You get called all over the place at the drop of a hat. Asking for an adjournment is the norm to give you chance. I am speaking from past experience here having in my past life practised at the Bar.
However the problem appears to be with the magistrate who dismissed the case so lightly.
Perhaps the press maul reported the actual facts.
I would add however that the Police should not prosecute as they have a vested interest and in the past put merit less cases to court.
Hope the CPS re-open or Sleazy take a civil case for damages! Now that could really make the culprits weep.
I have always been a fan of Alternative Dispute Resolution. Perhaps the Captain could just kick the pair in the lower regions then keel haul them en-route on the next sector
However the problem appears to be with the magistrate who dismissed the case so lightly.
Perhaps the press maul reported the actual facts.
I would add however that the Police should not prosecute as they have a vested interest and in the past put merit less cases to court.
Hope the CPS re-open or Sleazy take a civil case for damages! Now that could really make the culprits weep.
I have always been a fan of Alternative Dispute Resolution. Perhaps the Captain could just kick the pair in the lower regions then keel haul them en-route on the next sector
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-Foxtrot Oscar 69
I perhaps should have added a bit after vested interest. They arrested/investigated the job, they have a vested interest in making sure its presented properly. Its far better than either having costs awarded against Police (embaressing and lots of paperwork) or being made a fool of in front of a magistrate or jury.
Before the CPS came along I lst one job I prosecuted (as officer in case). After the CPS they were going left right and centre, ignoring the CPS perception of 'Not in the public interest' in procceding which when they first started meant, 'he might plead not guilty and that means we will have to put effort into it' to changing the charge to something totaly inappropriate and thus finding that the charge could not be proved.
The CPS, last time I dealt with them were far too fond of a bind over, which meant that they 'won' with no effort.
As for running round the courts circurt, well hard luck, Police used to have to do it, and lost far fewer jobs as a result.
There is certainly no justification in having a solicitor presenting breif facts in a guilty plea, or being there to ask for a remand in custody. Courts worked much quicker when a Police officer did that.
A few years ago the head of the CPS in London was interviewed on the BBC Local TV news and in his words the best person to present a case in court was the Police Officer in case. One of the few sensible things the CPS have ever said.
I perhaps should have added a bit after vested interest. They arrested/investigated the job, they have a vested interest in making sure its presented properly. Its far better than either having costs awarded against Police (embaressing and lots of paperwork) or being made a fool of in front of a magistrate or jury.
Before the CPS came along I lst one job I prosecuted (as officer in case). After the CPS they were going left right and centre, ignoring the CPS perception of 'Not in the public interest' in procceding which when they first started meant, 'he might plead not guilty and that means we will have to put effort into it' to changing the charge to something totaly inappropriate and thus finding that the charge could not be proved.
The CPS, last time I dealt with them were far too fond of a bind over, which meant that they 'won' with no effort.
As for running round the courts circurt, well hard luck, Police used to have to do it, and lost far fewer jobs as a result.
There is certainly no justification in having a solicitor presenting breif facts in a guilty plea, or being there to ask for a remand in custody. Courts worked much quicker when a Police officer did that.
A few years ago the head of the CPS in London was interviewed on the BBC Local TV news and in his words the best person to present a case in court was the Police Officer in case. One of the few sensible things the CPS have ever said.
