Jump to content

IOM COURTS SENTENCING


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 891
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Twenty years ago when the schools became devolved and management of the school budgets lay with the head teachers is when things began to change. The money was and is in exam enrolment.  When the

That was a big McSteak.

Sigh. Why is it that we have to wait for a major incident (jail, controversy on the world wide stage) before someone realises that perhaps expecting workers to come from the U.K. to a different j

Posted Images

18 hours ago, Gladys said:

To paraphrase from the linked article, the isolation exemption certificate "clearly stated" what they were to do and they had completed a risk assessment to protect others.  

Well quite, though that's assuming what Quayle read out in Tynwald was accurate rather than what whoever wrote it wanted everyone to hear.  And as the visitors are working in a (rightly) highly-regulated field, you would imagine that abiding by the rules was second nature.  But clearly it was in the interests of some not to have everything come out in Court.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, the stinking enigma said:

The worst I've heard so far was the lady that got a taxi at 3am to go to a homeless refuge after a row with her partner.. think she got jailed but it was all a bit early morning radio news vague.

Yes that was correct and only caught as she told taxi driver!! 
 

Yet we let Jersey 4 off and suspend jail for sex offenders again!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2020 at 7:35 PM, the stinking enigma said:

Wasn't that the rich bloke? 

It was, yeah.

As we're now on the fifth version of the entry regs (that's the 1st regs, 1st regs amendment, 2nd regs, 2nd regs 1st amendment, 2nd regs 2nd amendment, fact fans) it's fair to suggest that the law wasn't *quite* as watertight as they thought it was.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, tetchtyke said:

It was, yeah.

As we're now on the fifth version of the entry regs (that's the 1st regs, 1st regs amendment, 2nd regs, 2nd regs 1st amendment, 2nd regs 2nd amendment, fact fans) it's fair to suggest that the law wasn't *quite* as watertight as they thought it was.

I'm not saying it's ok but isn't it the life of most laws that they get challenged in courts and amended over time? it's just that it doesn't usually happen in extreme public scrutiny over 6 months

and realistically, irrespective of the matter involved, the people who can afford the best representation stand the best chance of winning their cases?

it does feel *wrong* though that there are people fleeing their homes at 3am in fear and in desperation and the result is 2 weeks in jail..... normally I'd be thinking there was more to it that we weren't aware of that got it to that stage but.... I dunno

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rhumsaa said:

I'm not saying it's ok but isn't it the life of most laws that they get challenged in courts and amended over time? it's just that it doesn't usually happen in extreme public scrutiny over 6 months

and realistically, irrespective of the matter involved, the people who can afford the best representation stand the best chance of winning their cases?

it does feel *wrong* though that there are people fleeing their homes at 3am in fear and in desperation and the result is 2 weeks in jail..... normally I'd be thinking there was more to it that we weren't aware of that got it to that stage but.... I dunno

That’s what has surprised me, that there hasn’t been an appeal against the prison sentences.

And no, some, most, of our criminal legal aid and duty advocates are of very high caliber. The pay rate is not determinative of quality.

There’ve been 2 cases overturned, rather than appealed, because it was realised the summary court didn’t have the power to convict.

The person who gave a wrong name on a private flight arrival,  and was isolating, so not a quarantine breach, where it was discovered the regulation wasn’t in force at the time of the alleged offence. A mistake common to the police, prosecution, court and defence.

The person who had obtained a re-entry certificate when subject to an exclusion order. It was later discovered that the court imposing the exclusion order had got it wrong, so the exclusion order fell away, as did the Covid borders and entry certificate offences.

And clearly, the regulations should allow an emergency flight defence/exemption, what happens if you’re isolating and your house catches fire, or, as in the case you quote, you are in danger. It’s not right that you get charged or imprisoned for escaping into the street.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Wright said:

The pay rate is not determinative of quality.

 

Quite correct, you pay for a rolls royce and get a reliant robin,  mr baines might have an opinion too.

Edited by WTF
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Wright said:

That’s what has surprised me, that there hasn’t been an appeal against the prison sentences.

Could it be that for most of the people convicted they just think that they'd rather do the few days and get it over with rather than drag the process out beyond the timeframe that serving the sentence would result in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rhumsaa said:

Could it be that for most of the people convicted they just think that they'd rather do the few days and get it over with rather than drag the process out beyond the timeframe that serving the sentence would result in?

But they would be entitled to damages 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Wasn’t he represented at trial by English Counsel, junior and QC?

If an advocate is pally pally, clubby clubby with the judge/deemster, as many seek to be if that 'bond' is not already there, then that will play heavily in their favour of course.

An English Councel, unless he has a particularly high status and is well-connected, is going to be up against it from the get-go.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rhumsaa said:

Could it be that for most of the people convicted they just think that they'd rather do the few days and get it over with rather than drag the process out beyond the timeframe that serving the sentence would result in?

There are a number of explanations, and that is one.

Another would be that the alternative sentence might be a very steep fine, one they couldn’t afford, and that would result in longer imprisonment in default.

There shouldn’t be an issue, they should be let out on bail pending appeal hearing, and as we now have two Deemsters and a judge of Appeal, all resident, the appeal could be heard within a week or 10 days.

An anecdotal comparison, but it’s true, and the fact similarity is good, but at risk of scandalising the court. The summary courts used to sentence first offence personal use cannabis  at 10-14 days. This is 30-40 years ago. Several young advocates advised appeals. They were brought on very quickly, within a week. Just the two Manx Deemsters. Never the judge of appeal.

The late Ian Brown and I spoke with Ben Hytner, our then judge of appeal. He was never asked to sit on those appeals. He suggested that we contacted his clerk before lodging any such appeals, we did, he sat, and the tariff was reduced to suspended sentences. A small step, but the first one. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Barlow said:

If an advocate is pally pally, clubby clubby with the judge/deemster, as many seek to be if that 'bond' is not already there, then that will play heavily in their favour of course.

An English Councel, unless he has a particularly high status and is well-connected, is going to be up against it from the get-go.

The QC was highly rated, a go to for that type of offence, and it was an acting Deemster, ie a judge from England.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...