Some basic Psychology (11)

Tue 26 Aug 08, 9:04 PM
redcat
UK(PE), 5 yrs
Over the last few years the life of a policeman has been increasingly dominated by targets. Convictions -good... touchy feelie time with the public -bad. Although policing is not driven exclusively by targets it is now a major factor, both at the level of force strategy and individual decision making.
Basically if some plod thinks he can read the riot act and his target will roll over and cop either to a guilty plea or a caution that is far far preferable to some awkward so-and-so who will fight fight and fight again at every level within the system and cost the force thousands of pounds and hundreds of hours of poice time for one piddling arrest.
Elsewhere some people (James you know who you are) seem to analyse public policy in purely superficial terms. What is stated by politicians is what they mean, what police stick in guidelines is what will happen. ACPO guidelines are often i reality seen to be just a source of spare paper at force level.
Its really worth digging below the surface a tad, a lot of NuLabour legislation is about 'sending a message' ditto activism. For all that we may not like it the economic cost both of the IRA and Fathers For Justice has been a major factor in persuading government to talk to groups it would rather not.
Lets get back to extreme porn... from contacts we have had over three years (not just three weeks james) there are elements in the police who see this as Operation Ore mark II an arrest-fest that will pay out the jackpot load of convicted perverts for next to no effort at all. One of the reasons for being active now is about putting down markers, its about starting to get the message out there that any attack on 'the community' will be resisted (legally) and if the police wish to take us on then they will do so by burning resources like theres no tomorrow.
So to summarise... are the police going to go for the easy arrest who will just accept a caution to keep things quiet and not make a fuss.... or will they go for the arrest who knows their rights, is going to call in specialist legal support, have renta mob turn up outside whichever nick its in and make a great big stink in the media and then keep on making that level of fuss.
Encouraging people to roll over and play easy isn't doing anyone a favour (except the police) and whether you've got extreme porn on your hard-drive or not your life is going to be turned upside down whilst you are in the nick.
PS The berlin wall coming down? That was james that was.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/objectification_in...
To be without some of the things you want is an indispensable part of happiness. – Bertrand Russel.
Edited Tue 26 Aug 08, 9:18 PM by redcat

26 Aug 08, 10:05 PM
Degenerate
UK, 21 mths
Yeah, hope Backlash is going to go on to form the main support structure for people arrested. Everyone who can needs to support Backlash moving forward with a new remit.
Anyone fancy being Backlash's new figurehead? Not hating CAAN too much would be a useful side skill as we're you're naughty cousin and whether you like it or not we're family !
De
ACTION NOTICE 22nd August LONDON - http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/weblogs/C_A_A_N... - COME WITH US OR JOIN IN FROM HOME! - CJIB Wiki and Seenoevil forum: - http://www.seenoevil.org.uk - The times they are a-changin' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZ_XwLSN45I - FREEDOM NOW!

26 Aug 08, 11:08 PM
TheTroll
5 mths
Degenerate wrote:
Anyone fancy being Backlash's new figurehead?
With the surplus of egomaniacs around it shouldn't be hard to find someone, however not having one might be better for actually getting things done.

26 Aug 08, 11:18 PM
DarkLordDredd
UK(NG), 6 yrs

redcat wrote:
Some basic Psychology
Encouraging people to roll over and play easy isn't doing anyone a favour (except the police) and whether you've got extreme porn on your hard-drive or not your life is going to be turned upside down whilst you are in the nick.
PS The berlin wall coming down? That was james that was.
Its been going on with sex related crimes, especially against children since 2000, and the numbers od suspect convictions have risen since the inception iof the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Defendants are often frightenned into accepting guilty pleas by their defence tram purely and simply because due to the nature of the accusations and the way the courts are loaded in favour of the prosecution this is not surprising.
There are now literally hundreds of cases of where the defence who invariably are funded by legal aid have done sod all to investigate. The defendant still rightfully maintains their innocence up to the day of the trial, and then strangely enough the CPS offer a "deal" with lots of charges not dismissed but acceptance of not guilty and are left on file and one or two token lesser charges are offered. This means the defendant gets a shorter sentance and only serves 50% inside with an automatic release date.
Given the chances of adverse publicity if the case has not already made the papers and the fact they are told that they'll get 5-10 years is enough to make anyone panic and accept the unacceptable. They are advised to do the courses and keep their heads down and all will be fine.
It's only once they are behind bars does the real reality of their situation hit home. Most judges these days are wise to the new legislation, many are QC's so they fully undrstand the predicament of the defendants situation. Even with a guilty verdict from the jury, many will admit privately that they do not believe the person is guilty but now it is almost impossible for a judge to dismiss charges. If they do the CPS will keep bringing them back as double jeopody no longer exists.
That is why many sex offenders seem to get very light sentences. This will carry on curtrently until "Blairs" barristers who are slowly worming their way into the judiciary fibnally end up on the bench and even more miscarriages of justice will take place.
The stories of "nonces" and paedo's getting beaten up in prison are highly exagerated, the prison service in general will put anyone convicted of any sexual offence straight on to VP (vulnerable persons) aka was section 43.
All of the prisoners on VP are there for their own safety, be it bullying, grassing, in debt etc and they will not risk being sent over to the main prison population because they know the consequences.
Hence the reason I'm finding myself fully employed dealing with genuine appeals. Anyone who is accused of a sexual offence is an easy target, as this government well knows. If your a government in trouble start adding news laws to make sex offenders lives a misery, easy brownie points, though a certain government minister screwed up with Paul Gadd recently!
So come January 2009 we will become the latest victims of this governments need to stay popular. The police will be looking for easy kills, and no doubt the CPS will be l;ooking forward to another batch of new lambs to the slaughter.
The press, especially the red tops will be their baying for blood, especially the Sun & the NoTW as if they can get a link to "depravity" and BDSM it'll be another way to justify outing MM as the nazi story has gone cold.
Me, I am seriously considering an offer of a job in Dubia as as far as I'm concerned this countrys gone to the dogs. No wonder the immigrants are going home, piss poor Euro exchange rate and lots of mad laws!

27 Aug 08, 3:22 AM
mq1965
UK(DA), 5 yrs

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Defendants are often frightenned into accepting guilty pleas by their defence tram purely and simply because due to the nature of the accusations and the way the courts are loaded in favour of the prosecution this is not surprising.
I think that is quite a slur on most defence lawyers. And frankly while there may be some career criminals who accept convictions as a hazard of the job, whether rightful or wrongful, I really don't think there are many innocent people who are easily persuaded to plead guilty.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
There are now literally hundreds of cases of where the defence who invariably are funded by legal aid have done sod all to investigate. The defendant still rightfully maintains their innocence up to the day of the trial, and then strangely enough the CPS offer a "deal" with lots of charges not dismissed but acceptance of not guilty and are left on file and one or two token lesser charges are offered. This means the defendant gets a shorter sentance and only serves 50% inside with an automatic release date.
I tend towards incompetence theories rather than conspiracy theories personally. Most deals at the door of the court are because one or both sides, lawyers or defendants themselves have not prepared properly or thought about the case, or the barristers can't be bothered to do the trial and are seeking a way out.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
It's only once they are behind bars does the real reality of their situation hit home. Most judges these days are wise to the new legislation, many are QC's so they fully undrstand the predicament of the defendants situation. Even with a guilty verdict from the jury, many will admit privately that they do not believe the person is guilty but now it is almost impossible for a judge to dismiss charges. If they do the CPS will keep bringing them back as double jeopody no longer exists.
What makes you think it is difficult for judges to dismiss cases? Nothing has changed to stop them doing that, and it still happens on a pretty regular basis to my knowledge. And the version I hear is that former defence lawyers tend to make the most vicious judges, because they are fully aware of the truth behind defence cases and know that most of their clients are guilty, rather than the other way round.
And double jeopardy has only been removed in the most limited of circumstances, such that it will happen in one or two very serious cases a year, and only when there is significant new evidence. You make it sound as if cases will be routinely re-tried every time there is an acquittal, which is light years from the truth.
On the other hand the defence can appeal all cases at least once, and often two or three times, and an acquittal at any of those stages will be an acquittal for ever in 99% or more of cases.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
That is why many sex offenders seem to get very light sentences.
Very light sentences as in not being lynched?

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Anyone who is accused of a sexual offence is an easy target, as this government well knows. If your a government in trouble start adding news laws to make sex offenders lives a misery, easy brownie points, though a certain government minister screwed up with Paul Gadd recently!
I don't know what the government thinks, but most lawyers that I know would regard sex offences as being the most difficult to prosecute, to the extent that they are believed to have some of the lowest conviction rates of any types of offences and there is constant work being done in police an CPS to try and improve the standard of prosecutions. No one would consder them an easy target.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Me, I am seriously considering an offer of a job in Dubia as as far as I'm concerned this countrys gone to the dogs. No wonder the immigrants are going home, piss poor Euro exchange rate and lots of mad laws!
This one makes me wonder seriously about your sanity. Do you seriously think that Dubai will have less repressive laws than the UK on any subject, let alone sexual freedom???

27 Aug 08, 10:43 AM
xjames
UK(SS), 2 yrs
Degenerate wrote:
Anyone fancy being Backlash's new figurehead? Not hating CAAN too much would be a useful side skill as we're you're naughty cousin and whether you like it or not we're family !
De
At the last Backlash meeting, it was very clear that without a new "leader", or at least someone to do the organising and chivvy everyone along, Backlash is likely to just wither away.
No one (including me you'll be please to hear De) was willing to put themselves forward. There is organisation for the next meeting - but this is very much on a pro-tem basis.
If anyone has some time and energy, there is a serious vacuum of leadership at Backlash right now.
This isn't to say that the group is without ideas. Things in the legal arena in terms of awareness and campaigns both before and after C-Day (as I've just coined it) are proposed.
Obligatory wanky Latin tagline: Neque porro quisquam est qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit

27 Aug 08, 4:04 PM
Degenerate
UK, 21 mths

RandomInternetPerv wrote:

Degenerate wrote:
Anyone fancy being Backlash's new figurehead?
With the surplus of egomaniacs around it shouldn't be hard to find someone, however not having one might be better for actually getting things done.

Yeah actually you are right. Leaders are one thing, but what's most important is that Backlash gets back as soon as possible to actively doing things with a new remit. I am sure leaders will become apparent via that process. The problem with finding leaders for something like Backlash is they need to be out - and actually there are far more people able to DO things than are able to be out. Perhaps doing things should be the priority. Anyone who is able to put time into Backlash needs to try and get to the next meeting when plans will be made.
De
CAAN - Beware the kinky porn ban! http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/p/C_A_A_N/ - CJIB Wiki and Seenoevil forum: - http://www.seenoevil.org.uk - The times they are a-changin' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZ_XwLSN45I - FREEDOM NOW!
Edited 27 Aug 08, 4:06 PM by Degenerate

27 Aug 08, 6:29 PM
DarkLordDredd
UK(NG), 6 yrs

mq1965 wrote:

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Defendants are often frightenned into accepting guilty pleas by their defence tram purely and simply because due to the nature of the accusations and the way the courts are loaded in favour of the prosecution this is not surprising.
I think that is quite a slur on most defence lawyers. And frankly while there may be some career criminals who accept convictions as a hazard of the job, whether rightful or wrongful, I really don't think there are many innocent people who are easily persuaded to plead guilty.

I speak as I find, why is that we can coberate evidence supplied to the original defence team and often find new suppirting evidence that was clearly easily available to the original defence team? These are not rare events, they are becoming increasingly regular and invariably nearly always involve legal aid paid for cases.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
There are now literally hundreds of cases of where the defence who invariably are funded by legal aid have done sod all to investigate. The defendant still rightfully maintains their innocence up to the day of the trial, and then strangely enough the CPS offer a "deal" with lots of charges not dismissed but acceptance of not guilty and are left on file and one or two token lesser charges are offered. This means the defendant gets a shorter sentance and only serves 50% inside with an automatic release date.
I tend towards incompetence theories rather than conspiracy theories personally. Most deals at the door of the court are because one or both sides, lawyers or defendants themselves have not prepared properly or thought about the case, or the barristers can't be bothered to do the trial and are seeking a way out.

I think the last part of your statement pretty much says it all really. The government intends further reducing the legal aid fees soon, more people will not get the legal representation they deserve as a result.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
It's only once they are behind bars does the real reality of their situation hit home. Most judges these days are wise to the new legislation, many are QC's so they fully undrstand the predicament of the defendants situation. Even with a guilty verdict from the jury, many will admit privately that they do not believe the person is guilty but now it is almost impossible for a judge to dismiss charges. If they do the CPS will keep bringing them back as double jeopody no longer exists.
What makes you think it is difficult for judges to dismiss cases? Nothing has changed to stop them doing that, and it still happens on a pretty regular basis to my knowledge. And the version I hear is that former defence lawyers tend to make the most vicious judges, because they are fully aware of the truth behind defence cases and know that most of their clients are guilty, rather than the other way round.
And double jeopardy has only been removed in the most limited of circumstances, such that it will happen in one or two very serious cases a year, and only when there is significant new evidence. You make it sound as if cases will be routinely re-tried every time there is an acquittal, which is light years from the truth.
On the other hand the defence can appeal all cases at least once, and often two or three times, and an acquittal at any of those stages will be an acquittal for ever in 99% or more of cases.

Judge dismisses case, CPS go away and return with a minute amount of "new evidence" and the trial starts again. Strangely enough this only generally seems to occur with sex related, racism related and some drug related cases. I think this has been mentioned on El Reg or similar, and it is something that various prisoners rights organisations have also commented on.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
That is why many sex offenders seem to get very light sentences.
Very light sentences as in not being lynched?

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Anyone who is accused of a sexual offence is an easy target, as this government well knows. If your a government in trouble start adding news laws to make sex offenders lives a misery, easy brownie points, though a certain government minister screwed up with Paul Gadd recently!
I don't know what the government thinks, but most lawyers that I know would regard sex offences as being the most difficult to prosecute, to the extent that they are believed to have some of the lowest conviction rates of any types of offences and there is constant work being done in police an CPS to try and improve the standard of prosecutions. No one would consder them an easy target.

If sex offendrrs are not an easy target, how did Jacqui Smith manage to cock-up an easy target when Paul Gadd was on his way home. If there was not some political mileage in attacking sex offenders then she would not have said a word. If your a government in trouble, use law annd order, combined with the safety of the most vulnerable and you've got lovely pro-government headlines.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Me, I am seriously considering an offer of a job in Dubia as as far as I'm concerned this countrys gone to the dogs. No wonder the immigrants are going home, piss poor Euro exchange rate and lots of mad laws!
This one makes me wonder seriously about your sanity. Do you seriously think that Dubai will have less repressive laws than the UK on any subject, let alone sexual freedom???

I know plenty of people who work in Dubia and have done so without any problems from the state or their law enforcement community. Yes, some british folks have ended up on the wrong side of the law recently over there, but that was down to their own crass stupidity.
The very fact that the state over there does not generally intrude on wehat goes on behind your front door, especially in what is an islamic state pretty shows up this government and this country for the state it is in at the moment due to 11 years of New Labour knee jerk reactions.

27 Aug 08, 8:28 PM
mq1965
UK(DA), 5 yrs

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Judge dismisses case, CPS go away and return with a minute amount of "new evidence" and the trial starts again. Strangely enough this only generally seems to occur with sex related, racism related and some drug related cases. I think this has been mentioned on El Reg or similar, and it is something that various prisoners rights organisations have also commented on.
I really don't know where you get this idea from, but it isn't reality. The ability to have an acquittal set aside is dealt with in Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. There are a lot of complicated provisions, but far from producing a minute amount of new evidence and restarting a trial, a new trial can only take place after the prosecutor has obtained the written consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions and then made an aplication to the Court of Appeal. The application will only succeed if there is compelling new evidence - which is defined as meaning substantial evidence amongst other things - and if it is in the public interest. It doesn't apply to all offences either, only the most serious - those involving killing or endangering life, serious sexual offences, top end drug dealing and that's about it.
It really is extremely limited, and will be very rare.

DarkLordDredd wrote:
I know plenty of people who work in Dubia and have done so without any problems from the state or their law enforcement community. Yes, some british folks have ended up on the wrong side of the law recently over there, but that was down to their own crass stupidity.
The very fact that the state over there does not generally intrude on wehat goes on behind your front door, especially in what is an islamic state pretty shows up this government and this country for the state it is in at the moment due to 11 years of New Labour knee jerk reactions.
And I know vast numbers of people who live and work in the UK and have never had the state intrude into what happens in their bedroom, at least not in practice. The state here actually doesn't generally intrude into what goes on behind your front door. While we are all concerned about what may happen under CJIA the number of actual arrests (as opposed to, say, newspaper outings) for BDSM related activities is minute - I am only aware of three or four famous cases, and unless anyone knows differently I don't think there are loads going unreported.
What we are concerned about is that they could intrude, and in that respect I would (without any real knowledge of the law in Dubai) be pretty prepared to bet that the state in Dubai has far greater powers to intrude than it does in the UK. I'd also be prepared to bet that if people were indiscrete enough to let it be known that they were getting up to kinky activities the authorities in Dubai would be quicker to intervene than the UK authorities. Unless you are rich and powerful, but I don't think we want to go down that route.

27 Aug 08, 9:11 PM
DarkLordDredd
UK(NG), 6 yrs

mq1965 wrote:

DarkLordDredd wrote:
Judge dismisses case, CPS go away and return with a minute amount of "new evidence" and the trial starts again. Strangely enough this only generally seems to occur with sex related, racism related and some drug related cases. I think this has been mentioned on El Reg or similar, and it is something that various prisoners rights organisations have also commented on.
I really don't know where you get this idea from, but it isn't reality. The ability to have an acquittal set aside is dealt with in Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. There are a lot of complicated provisions, but far from producing a minute amount of new evidence and restarting a trial, a new trial can only take place after the prosecutor has obtained the written consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions and then made an aplication to the Court of Appeal. The application will only succeed if there is compelling new evidence - which is defined as meaning substantial evidence amongst other things - and if it is in the public interest. It doesn't apply to all offences either, only the most serious - those involving killing or endangering life, serious sexual offences, top end drug dealing and that's about it.
It really is extremely limited, and will be very rare.

I never mentioned acquittals at all, I said judges throwing cases out, which often happens before the trial is even under way. Acquittals are a completely different kettle of fish and are rarely challenged. I obviously should have emphasied that point.
However, when a judge dismissed charges or threw a case out before it was heard by a jury few if any ever returned to the bench. Now as the CPS seem to be very target orientated if they can get a case re-introduced. New evidence introduced, often circumstantial and this keeps going on until either the CPS/police run out of evidence or they find a magistrates court prepared to hear it. Unfortunately, too many magistrates courts kick the case straight upstairs without any real examination of the evidence now.
I've come across atleast 80 cases of this happening to date, and I've no doubt more will becoming my way.

27 Aug 08, 10:56 PM
mq1965
UK(DA), 5 yrs

DarkLordDredd wrote:
I never mentioned acquittals at all, I said judges throwing cases out, which often happens before the trial is even under way. Acquittals are a completely different kettle of fish and are rarely challenged. I obviously should have emphasied that point.
However, when a judge dismissed charges or threw a case out before it was heard by a jury few if any ever returned to the bench. Now as the CPS seem to be very target orientated if they can get a case re-introduced. New evidence introduced, often circumstantial and this keeps going on until either the CPS/police run out of evidence or they find a magistrates court prepared to hear it. Unfortunately, too many magistrates courts kick the case straight upstairs without any real examination of the evidence now.
I've come across atleast 80 cases of this happening to date, and I've no doubt more will becoming my way.
We are getting into very technical legal issues now, a long way from the OP, so I won't reply at length. Suffice to say that there is now a tendency to dismiss cases that are not yet fully ready, and those can be brought back when they are properly prepared. Also it is no longer the place of Magistrates Courts to examine a case before sending it 'upstairs' (to Crown Court) unless the defence ask them to, which is very rare. Nothing unfortunate about it, just a change in procedural law.

Next page


	©1997-2008 Informed Consent