Skip to main content

Travelling the open road

My experience of the rule of law is that for people to respect it it needs to be enforced. I have had conversations with travellers who believe that British Law does not apply to them. That is whey they feel they have a right to pack their caravans on parks such as Oaklands and dump tarmac on them.

My view is simply this. The rule of law applies to everyone in the UK and should be enforced.

There is an interesting post on one of the police blogs about this issue. I tend to be sympathetic with the general position of police officers. The rule of law should be enforced.

Comments

Thats the other side of the coin, as there are travellers and true romany gypies, a lot of difference to them both for abiding to the law.

However on the Law being enforced, Yes quite right as many of us are law biding citazins,
But what does a Law biding Citazin do when the LAW it self is used against them, when it should be working for them, to help them and to protect them.

This too accounts for police, they have the CPS above them, dictating what warrents court and what does not, and the boundaries they line out do not do justice to anyone in this country. A case can be prepared by the police only to be knocked back in the victims face once it goes to the crown prosicution system.

So you see, it is alright the laws being made, but 99% of the time the law enforcers do not imply their own written word!..

The travellers that dump rubbish are the tip of the ice berg compared to how this system does not comply with its own rules to law abiding citazins...

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…