Skip to main content

Secret Prisoner to move to Ford Open Prison

The story so far:

About 2 weeks ago Charles Roy Taylor (age 71) was imprisoned by Nottingham Family Court (Judge Mitchell) in private proceedings for 20 months.

There was a bit of confusion as to the nature of the proceedings. It has been clarified (not that it was unclear to start out with) that the UK cannot have secret prisoners and that his name, offence and length of sentence need to be public.

We are now at the stage where "the system" (being the Ministry of Justice) now admit that he has been convicted and sentenced to 20 months for contempt of court - ie breaking a court order.

The question, of course, is which court order and what did he do.

I think the law is quite clear that it needs to be public as to exactly what he did to end up being locked up for 20 months.

This clear Munby J judgment makes it entirely clear (para 49) that orders should normally be public. So we need to know.

What was the court order that resulted in him getting 20 months for breach and what has he done.

He is now being scheduled to move to Ford Open Prison. At the same time, however, we need to know why so much scarce prison time is being used for what he did.

Comments

Zoompad said…
It's very strange. I thought the prisons were supposed to be full? I wonder if the governer of Ford Open Prison knows what crime this man has committed?

It's timely that this should have happened so close to Christmas. There was another man arrested 2000 years ago and no-one knows what his crime was supposed to have been either!

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.