Posts Tagged ‘prosecute’
My MP, Richard Drax, To Write To David Cameron On Drugs Policy
The Honourable Member For Dorset South
Today I met with my MP, Richard Drax. He was just as sickeningly handsome and charming as I expected him to be! So I showed him no mercy and bombarded him with my opinions for a good half an hour.
I realised afterwards that my favourite maxim “less is more” would have been a better strategy. Nevertheless, he did offer to write to David Cameron on my behalf on drugs policy and seemed genuinely sympathetic to some of the points I made.
I have just sent him a lengthy email in confirmation which I reproduce below. If anyone wishes to use this as a template for a letter or email to their own MP, please feel free to do so.
******
Dear Richard,
Thank you so much for your time today. I very much enjoyed meeting you. As I said, I came with opinions not problems. I am grateful to you for listening to me.
I realise that I made the classic mistake of bombarding you with far too much information and not giving you time to absorb any. I hope I may correct that error by summarising here what we talked about.
1. Gary McKinnon. Thank heavens that progress seems to have been made on this. The idea of an “extradition” treaty that provides for someone to be sent to the USA for trial on an alleged crime committed here is iniquitous. It’s particularly unfair in McKinnon’s case as he suffers from Asperger’s syndrome. You pointed out to me that similar dangers exist with the new European arrest warrant.
I would urge you to do everything possible to ensure that if Gary McKinnon is to be tried, it should take place in the UK.
2. Ian Tomlinson. In my view the failure to prosecute the policeman who assaulted him is an outrage and Keir Starmer’s reasons entirely inadequate. Now that the credibility of the pathologist in the case has been destroyed by a GMC panel, Starmer should at least reconsider and hopefully reverse his decision.
References here:
http://pjroldblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/killer-cop-harwood-must-be-charged/
http://pjroldblog.wordpress.com/2010/07/24/keir-starmer-the-next-lord-widgery/
I would urge you to press for a re-consideration of the decision not to bring charges. If no criminal charges are brought, at the very least the disciplinary hearing should be held in public as the rules allow. The Tomlinson family are entitled to justice.
3. Drugs policy. You very kindly agreed to write to David Cameron on my behalf. I am very concerned at the conduct of the Home Office at present and particularly James Brokenshire, the Minister for Crime Prevention who is causing great damage to both the coalition governemnt and the Tory party by promoting ideas and policies that contradict virtually all expert opinion, including the government’s own scientific advisers. He also seems to be completely at odds with the calls for drug law reform which both David Cameron and Nick Clegg have made consistently over the last 10 years.
This is not a peripheral or secondary issue. According to Baroness Meacher in the House of Lords on 15th June 2010, “There is no more obvious waste than the £19 billion annual cost of the UK’s war on drugs”.
There is a huge amount of reference material on this subject on my blog:
http://pjroldblog.wordpress.com/?s=drugs
I would also refer you to the Transform Drug Policy Foundation which has highly detailed and almost universally acclaimed proposals for drug regulation:
Virtually all experts agree that the “war on drugs” has failed. In exactly the same way as alcohol prohibition in the US led to a massive increase in crime and violence, so drug prohibition has created an illegal market said to be worth £350 billion per year. It has also financed civil war in Latin America for 25 years and is the principal source of finance for Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Our soldiers are dying every day because of the illegal trade in opiates. Why don’t we just buy up the whole crop for the next 10 years? It would be much cheaper in both cash and lives than the Afghan war.
Virtually all experts agree that regulation would be a better solution. I have distilled the following five point plan from everything that I have read and learned over more than 30 years:
1. An end to oppression of drug users (at least 10 million UK citizens)
2. Removal from the criminal law of any offence for possession and/or social supply
3. Fact and evidence-based policy, information and regulation
4. Re-direction of law enforcement resources against real criminals
5. Treat problematic drug use as a health issue
Five years ago, while campaigning for the Tory party leadership, David Cameron called for “fresh thinking and a new approach” towards drugs policy and said that it would be “disappointing if radical options on the law on cannabis were not looked at”. Nick Clegg has promised to repeal “illiberal, intrusive and unnecessary” laws and to stop “making ordinary people criminals”. There can be no better example of this than the laws against personal use and cultivation of cannabis, particularly for medicinal reasons. The coalition government’s new Your Freedom website has been inundated with proposals to legalise cannabis and to end the futile war on drugs. In July a poll carried out for the LibDems showed 70% of people in favour of legalising cannabis.
The Home Office and James Brokenshire are completely out of touch with expert and public opinion as well as the declared views of both the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister.
In my view, regulation means tighter control on the most dangerous drugs such as heroin, cocaine and alcohol and lighter regulation on relatively harmless substances like cannabis and ecstasy.
There is also the very important question of medicinal cannabis. The discovery of the endocannabinoid system in 1998 has led to an ever-escalating volume of evidence of the medicinal value of cannabis. In June the MHRA approved Sativex as an MS medicine in the UK. It is a whole plant extract yet presently, the Home Office refuses to consider a regulated system of the plant itself for medicinal purposes. This is completely irrational and absurd. The House Of Lords scientific committee recommended such a system should be introduced 12 years ago. Medicinal cannabis is available and regulated throughout almost all of Europe, Israel and 14 states in the USA (with 12 more in the planning stage). The UK stands almost alone in its obstinate refusal even to consider such a system.
Already this is leading to quite obscene injustices where patients have been prescribed Sativex by their doctor but their health authority has refused to fund it and patients are then facing criminal prosecution for cultivating their own plants. There is a case of exactly this going on in the Dorchester Crown Court at present and the CPS insists it is in the public interest to prosecute!
Thank you once again for listening to me Richard. I hope these notes are useful in composing your letter to David Cameron and I look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Kind regards,
Peter Reynolds
British Justice On Trial
Thugs, Slimeballs And Grunts
At last, four of the Metropolitan Police’s Territorial Support Group are to stand in the dock charged with assault causing actual bodily harm and a jury is to decide their fate. They are PC Nigel Cowley, PC Mark Jones, PC Roderick James-Bowen and DC John Donohue.
He's Got To Go
Perhaps Keir Starmer, Director Of Public Prosecutions, thinks he will win back some credibility through this after his catastrophically bad judgement in the Ian Tomlinson case. Not a bit of it. In fact, the decision to prosecute now after a successful civil claim against these thugs, proves how negligent the original decision was. The CPS is charged to uphold the public interest by statute. It should not have to be harried to the Court reluctantly by civil action. Yet again, Keir Starmer should hang his head in shame. In fact, he should resign
These officers have already been proven on the balance of probabilities to have illegally assaulted Babar Ahmad in 2003. Last year the High Court heard that he was subject to “serious, gratuitous, prolonged, unjustified violence” and “religious abuse”. Now the criminal courts will seek to extend that proof to beyond a reasonable doubt. Meanwhile, the Met, which decided against any disciplinary action, chooses not even to suspend these proven thugs and bullies. Sir Paul Stephenson should join them in the dock. His disrespect for due process is astounding. How can he have such men under his command? The IPCC also failed in this case – yet again. In 2007, it decided to take no action against any of the officers.
Keeping Mum
Almost every day now, new horror stories of illegal, brutal or simply dumb police behaviour are revealed. This is the reward we have reaped from the massive investment and huge increase in salaries we gave to the police in the 80s. According to my contact with inside knowledge it is due to a “collapse in supervision…and an arrogance due to few cops having much other work experience”. The police service is no such thing for the average British citizen. It is a self-serving bureaucracy with an aggressive sub-culture, acting as a revenue generating workforce for the state. It is institutionalised racism, brutality, prejudice, bullying, corruption, cowardice, freemasonry, all dressed up in a jack-the-lad, paramilitary uniform. It isn’t even any good at what it does. Aside from dealing with road accidents and high-level anti-terrorism, I know of little good work done by the British police. It has become an out of control monster that avoids doing what the public wants and picks and chooses what to devote its resources to.
PC Simon Harwood
If Keir Starmer can reverse his decsion on these thugs who beat up a suspected terrorist, he can also reverse his decison on the fatal assault on Ian Tomlinson, an entirely innocent bystander. Meanwhile we await impatiently the coroner’s inquest on his death and the disciplinary hearing against PC Simon Harwood, which must be held in public in accordance with the statutory provisions.
Every time that a police officer breaks the law or exceeds his powers he breaches our trust. It is the same as a bank employee stealing from his bank. It must be punished particularly severely. This must be the standard that British police adhere to. We must never relent from calling the corrupt and incompetent to account.
We Wait For Justice
Whether a conviction is possible in this latest case, seven years after the events took place, I don’t know. On the basis of its own rules the CPS must believe a conviction is more likely than not or it wouldn’t be proceeding . Justice delayed though, is justice denied for Babar Ahmad and the policemen. This repeated and continuing incompetence by the prosecution and regulatory authorities is every bid as dangerous as the deterioration in the police. Suspicions of corruption, collusion and conspiracy are inevitable and must be answered. These are serious threats to British justice.
Keir Starmer – The Next Lord Widgery?
No Better Than A Terrorist
The scandalous decision not to prosecute PC Simon Harwood over the death of Ian Tomlinson is reverberating right across the world.
British justice has become a laughing stock and our proud history of freedom, liberty and fairness is heaped with derision – and deservedly so
When the establishment needs to dissemble and misinform it calls on its tame lawyers and paper tiger figureheads. Keir Starmer, the DPP, is clearly angling for his peerage and his place on the government roster of professional liars, deceivers and propagandists.
In 1972, when British soldiers murdered protestors on the streets of Londonderry, they wheeled out Lord Widgery who produced a report of such crass dishonesty and fundamental deception that it took a further enquiry lasting 12 years and costing £200 million to expose it as nonsense.
When millions across the world have witnessed the unprovoked assault from behind on Ian Tomlinson, they have wheeled out Keir Starmer, another tame QC, to demonstrate a complete absence of integrity and deliver a deeply corrupt, manipulative and unforgivable decision not to prosecute.
In the last 50 years more than 1,000 people have died while in police custody in the UK but not a single policeman has been prosecuted.
Is it any wonder that we have pond life like Raoul Moat feted and worshipped by the underclass when they suffer under the yoke of police oppression, when they see no justice nor fairness nor hope?
The truth is that PC Simon Harwood and Raoul Moat are two peas from the same pod. Police websites, such as the notorious Inspector Gadget, reveal serving police officers’ attitudes just as perverse as those that supported the Raoul Moat Facebook page. The police are completely out of control, ineffective, mismanaged and corrupt.
It took 30 years for the Metropolitan Police to admit that one of its officers was responsible for the death of Blair Peach.
The suggestion from the extreme left is that we are being softened up and desensitised against a future where with swingeing public expenditure cuts we can expect to see riots in the streets and more police violence. I don’t buy this conspiracy theory but I am desperately worried for the future of British justice when men like Keir Starmer are in charge.
It isn’t just incompetence. It isn’t just misjudgement. There is clear intent to pervert the course of justice. He knew that the six month limit on bringing a charge of common assault was passing. He knew that the conflict between expert evidence was for a jury to determine. He knew that never was it more essential “in the public interest” for a prosecution to be brought.
Keir Starmer is every bit as dangerous to the fabric of our society as any terrorist or subversive. Look at how many lives Lord Widgery’s behaviour was responsible for. Look at how his lies prolonged the violence and fed the divisions within Northern Ireland. The same thing is happening all over again.
PC Simon Harwood, Raoul Moat, Keir Starmer. They are all the same. They are all a danger to society. They should all be behind bars.
Moat’s Last Moments. Are All Our Policemen Wonderful?
Almost Over
On Friday night they had Raoul Moat cornered at last. It was the culmination of something more akin to a military invasion than a reasonable response to just one deranged nutter. Northumbria Police had already made fools of themselves but we were all biting our lips, not yet protesting, hoping against hope that there would be no further casualties.
The first photographs from the stand-off were released and they clearly showed police pointing tasers. On BBC News the ex-police firearms expert was interviewed and asked why a taser couldn’t be used to disable Moat. He answered quite unequivocally that using a taser when a man has a gun pointed at his head was more than likely to result in him firing the weapon involuntarily.
First thing on Saturday morning and it was no surprise to learn that Moat was dead. What was utterly shocking was to learn that two tasers had been fired and the recording broadcast by the BBC revealed the shouting before the sound of the shotgun blast. The unavoidable conclusion is that exactly what the firearms expert had predicted was what happened.
I don’t have any sympathy for Moat. As far as I’m concerned a good case could have been made for him being shot on sight but I am very, very unhappy with the way the police handled the affair.
All Over Now
It may be that the denouement itself was handled properly. We will never know what really happened however many inquiries we have. What I am certain of is that overall the police should have done much better. Those far, far better qualified to judge than me have already said as much. I speak only as a concerned citizen.
I really worry about our police service. While I believe there are many brave, honourable coppers, some of whom are highly skilled, there are too many worrying indications that our police service is not up to the job.
There’s thuggery and the rank-closing covering-up and justification of it. There’s the appalling canteen culture which is at the root of all the institutionalised racism, thuggery and freemasonry. There’s the amateurish approach of senior officers who seem barely competent at times. There is inevitably some corruption but also a long-running deception that the decision to prosecute is at arms length. The police decide who to investigate in the first place. The CPS and the police eat in the same canteen
Look at the brutality of the police, the TSG in particular, at the Gaza and G20 protests and how they’ve got away with it. Look at the Inspector Gadget police website for an insight into the disgusting attitude of many officers. Look at the management of situations like the Cumbrian shootings and the Raoul Moat affair and the use of ludicrous, self-evidently bad ideas like the “kettling” at the Gaza and G20 protests. Look at the income generation from speed cameras promoted by some chief constables. Look at the absurd, intrusive, wildly excessive use of CCTV. Look at the ridiculous administration routines that many chief constables have imposed. Look at the insistence on retaining the DNA of innocent people.
The police are now very well paid. A starting police officer gets about twice as much as a starting soldier. They have wonderful pension arrangements. They’re also excused, let off and get away with behaviour that should never be allowed. Look at the thug, Sergeant Delroy Smellie , who repeatedly beat Nicola Fisher at the G20 protest and got away with it, or the officer who assaulted Ian Tomlinson, who later died, and who has still not been charged over a year later.
All the brave, honourable coppers are let down by those bad apples which myopic “support” of the police allows to rot and infect the rest.
The British police service needs a shake up. It is complacent and inefficient. Excellent work is done in anti-terrorism and organised crime but the truth is not all our policemen are wonderful. We need to face up to that truth and make some changes. Perhaps locally elected police chiefs are a way forward.
MPs Evading Justice
So are we supposed to be surprised that Gordon Brown is still clinging by his fingernails to the architrave at the door of number 10? They couldn’t organise a piss-up in a brewery, an orgy in an whorehouse or a coup in the Labour Party. Why? Because they all have nothing but their own interests at heart. Their last year in office, their pensions, their resettlement grants. These are not men. They are manipulative, morally microscopic mice.
Phwooaar! Gerrumorrf darlin'!
Plod PR, the go-getting communications agency, wholly owned by the police with exclusively the police as clients summoned all its collective intelligence and wisdom to determine that last Friday, the day after the European and local elections would be a busy news day, a perfect occasion to bury their cowardly, disgraceful announcement that MPs will not be prosecuted.
In fact, the expenses scandal has now morphed into an excuse for poor performance in the elections. This is a triumph of misinformation over truth. Over the weekend, we were asked to sympathise over the “assault on MPs about their expenses”. If what has happened has constitued assault then my feeling is that it’s time for some GBH with intent.
Everything has now been re-geared to enable them all to get away with it. Perhaps even more worrying is that this marks a new development in the politicisation of the police. Increasingly the police are being used to support and enforce the whim of government, irrespective of the law or justice.
The Taxpayers’ Alliance is still chasing down MPs (see here) but what has happened to the Telegraph? Have they had a visit in the middle of the night from the police or have big, fat, brown envelopes been distributed around Telegraph Towers – or both?
Criminal Deception
In a cold hearted, clinical and utterly callous way, we must bring “Sir” Fred Goodwin to heel, to the gutter, to grovel and to ignominy as he richly and deeply deserves.
There are many ways that the government can do this. I suggest that the most effective is simply not to pay him and let him sue. This is a 
pragmatic and commercial approach but, irrespective of its outcome, simultaneously we must prosecute this fundamentally evil individual with all the vigour that honourable and decent society can muster.
If we force him to sue for the rewards of failure then he will have to make his case and I do not believe he wil be able to under the overriding doctrine of “reasonableness”.
However, in the interests of justice, denying him money is insufficient. Nothing less than criminal punishment will suffice. Surely, if our tradition of common law has any relevance, it must be able to sanction his behaviour.
Lawyers must consider whether there is a case for criminal negligence, for conspiracy, for perjury or for any derivative of theft. Our Judges must package his offences in a way that can produce serious and effective penalties.
Without doubt though this “man”, this “Sir” has deceived. He lied to the Select Committee saying that he had received no compensation for loss of office. He has cheated us all. Whether he retains his obscene pension or not he must be jailed. Only then will justice be done.
Peter Reynolds 