im have a tial for common assult tomorrow...whats the general sentance's given for this offence?
I thought community service was carried out pretty quickly? Why is there such a delay? Shouldn't the local council always have something on the go?
Oh, never mind, three silly questions in a row, there.
Sigh!! More tinkering by this government hoping the public will buy the b******t. Trouble is where's the alternative?
Bystander, the most recent document about unpaid work and courses on which I can readily lay my hands, the Probation Service's document National Standards 2005, suggests that unpaid work is supposed to start within 10 working days of the sentence being passed (SS 6.6) and that courses are supposed to start as soon as possible but within 6 weeks (SS 8.6).
From what you say, though, this is being widely ignored.
(Not ignored, Notso, it's just that Probation doesn't always have the courses available without a wait. I don't blame them. The have been buggered about as much as any of us)
Edited By Siteowner
One day you'll tell us how you really feel about the constant revolution in the CJS.
Coppersblog has spotted the aside about reducing red tape for Plod. I mean, commissioning a study to investigate the possibility of reducing red tape for Plod. I can hear consultancy outfit up and down the country rubbing their collective paws and cackling with unrestrained glee.
Did we all spot the BBC's piece on bullying; most of the Have Your Sayers seem to be intoning "Cane the blighters". Why stop when they get out of the schoolyard?
Punnishment for your crime,
Offensive and personal remarks removed. You don't know any more about this chap than I do.
This is not the place for that kind of bigotry
Edited By Siteowner
Edited By Siteowner
Well I thought Charlie (advisedly!) Falconer's party piece on Radio 4 this morning was hilarious.
He always reminds me of an overexcited turkey, squawking and spluttering and flapping his wings about.
Remarkably uncool really, and a complete politico, of course. No pragmatism and no sense of justice, either. The sooner he goes, the better.
The sooner they all go, the better.
I suppose it must vary from area to area, Bystander. I know that in my neck of the woods they have problems finding places on some courses -- the one for sex offenders is apparently problematic because it's such a long course and most people do it in prison rather than on probation, for obvious reasons. Consequently there can be quite a wait for a new one to start. But my impression is that the shorter courses for which there's a greater demand, like Think First, aren't too difficult to get find places on.
But I agree Probation are extremely fed up -- they were all wondering today about who on earth the government expects is going to supervise all these extra community sentences, because they're completely snowed under as it is, because staff have been leaving in droves as a result of all the messing about and then not being replaced.
The good news hidden in this is that the police throughout England and Wales will be reviewed. Yippee. This might answer our question of where are all the police. So, that's got to be good news right?
Unfortunately, it is not looking promising. The following link on the home office's website to the policy document is "corrupt"...Document doesn't launch...Oh dear.. Perhaps we weren't meant to read it...
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/doc...-justice-
policy
Your average scroat doesn't have driving licence nor does he care either.
Taking it off him is going to be a bit of a pointless punishment.
Seems to bear out my question in an earlier post - that resources are not being put into the probation service to make it an effective alternative to custody. Plus ca change
"I am sorry to repeat myself from a previous post, but the only word for this is 'bollocks'."
....... and that's why we love you so.
Simon Jenkins is about as impressed as I am:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
commen...2044473,00.html
Shotgun approach.
Some of it will work, especially when they get reelected (what, there will still be elections?).
The Labour party now has enough powers to turn this country into a non-elective dictatorship, whenever is convenient to them (probably after the next election).
Labour is currently in process of deep destruction of the NHS, the Police Forces, the CPS, the Judiciary, the armed forces, civil society (particularly the family and its values, which have indeed).
Basically, nuLabour has adopted the anarchistic approach of "destruction".
(When this has been achieved, anarchistic "theory" indicates that you may then remake society to your own liking, in your own image and likeness, should you so wish.)
Sad but true, and Bystander's post indicates just one more example of the nuLabour anarchists putting another nail in.
I watched these guys at University several decades ago, and was disgusted by their selfish appetite for power...and yet fascinated, just like the electorate.
Bystander, does a Magistrate have the power to commit someone who appears insane by speaking 'bollocks' into a Mental Home? If so, please go ahead...NOW!
You have the list...
This is rather an aside, but [b]Nichola Turner[/b], I can see you reading this.
It's a small, open plan world we live in, and no mistake.
What a relief! When I read the news I thought they were going to complete the implemetation of the 1993 Criminal Justice Bill!!!!
We are now going to have to relearn more "new" bits and pieces" that we had forgotten from the mountain of previous legislation
Peter says:
"The Labour party now has enough powers to turn this country into a non-elective dictatorship, whenever is convenient to them (probably after the next election)."
What are these powers precisely?
Just heard on BBC, Home Office to be divided until we are able to extract a Ministry of Justice from its soul. So we get a HO and a MoJ, can't be bad. Can it?
Home Office to be divided ...
I have a few replica Titanic deckchairs if that would help?
In response to Ivor Monkey's question asked on 03.28.07 at 10:43 pm :
A major set of such powers is contained in the
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act
2006
Best wishes
Peter
Peter says:
"A major set of such powers is contained in the
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act"
Peter, this isn't true. While the Bill initally contained some jaw dropping measures, the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 contains no such powers. In fact, the Act specifically exempts measures of a constitutional significance from the streamlined procedure. Besides, all orders under the LRRA would still need to go through parliament.
..anything else?
NuLabour? Mugabe would be proud!
I think the correct designations will be MiniSec and MiniJust.
Yet another rebranding, from LCD to DCA to MoJ.
Here's a radical thought, why not use that money to fund the criminal justice system?
No? Too radical? I might give up my wig and become a get into the 'corporate rebranding and stationary' game.
W&G
before you do remember you need to be a trendy consultant to do it. There is no way they will let us do the rebranding ourselves. You can also bet there will have to be 000's spent on consultants on how to carry out the split and merge which will be long on concept and (very) short on practicalities.
I did rather enjoy the exasperated tone of your post, Bystander. This and other reforms (see yesterday's announcement of the Home Office restructuring, as mentioned above by others) are about being seen to be doing something about crime. It's much quicker to stick out a report saying what you will do, rather than wait for the actual measures to kick in and wait a couple of years to see if they will really have any effect on reducing crime. The timespan of the law enforcement agenda is ridiculously short these days, and the criminal justice system simply should not be expected to deliver outcomes to reflect the day to day whims of politicians.
"Besides, all orders under the LRRA would still need to go through parliament. "
How about the Civil Contingencies Act?
That allows ministers, to suspend or enact laws via a delegated royal prerogative if there's an "emergency".
Which is defined in wooly terms as including anything happening which might "may cause" disruption to the financial system or the health services or the transport network.
(Which seems like a pretty good description of the current government...)
Katie says:
"How about the Civil Contingencies Act?"
But isn't it reasonable, for states to have the option when faced with emergencies of exercising extraordinary powers, subject to reasonable safeguards? Is there a modern state that doesn't have the option on its statute books?
Besides, even without the Civil Contingencies Act (CCA), the Government would still have powers to take a wide range of measures in Emergencies, such as under the Emergency Powers Act 1920.
Isn’t it also true, that in the absence of such legislation, the Government might take emergency
action under the royal prerogative, which would be subject to even less scrutiny and fewer safeguards?
For example, a regulation made under Part 2 of the CCA could be struck down by the courts and (I think) leaves people to pursue legal remedies against potential violations of theer human rights.
sorry forgot to sign above..
Commenting by HaloScan
