howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
last week we had dave telling us about the no nonense sentences that would be handed
out to rioters, in the background we saw people walking free from court, today we have the home secretary showing her ignorance of the law.
"The Crown Prosecution Service is to order prosecutors to apply for anonymity to be lifted in any youth case they think it is in the public interest.
The law currently protects the identity of any suspect under the age of 18, even if they are convicted, but it also allows for an application to have such restrictions lifted, if deemed appropriate.
The Daily Telegraph reported concerns last week that young offenders involved in the disturbances that swept the country were walked from court without significant punishments - and were still remaining anonymous.
But Theresa May has revealed that she wants as many of the young criminals identifying as possible.
She said: "When I was in Manchester last week, the issue was raised to me about the anonymity of juveniles who are found guilty of crimes of this sort."
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Howard, I think most rioters brought their loot straight to the house of their parents and other family members, with whom they live, and boasted of it to their neighbours.
Their rooms are probably littered with stolen property. They are probably known locally as gang members anyway.
Many of them will probably consider their features being shown publicly as looters as a kind of public recognition, and a form of promotion within the gang.
Many will probably get worse, not better.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
A cheap trick, totally in keeping with the Tory norm.
On the other hand identifying youngsters who may be easily led will be of some use to one or two sections of the community.
No doubt this is the Conservative push to attract any and all votes it can get it grubby little hands on, or it's high-powered ministers being led by the last thing somebody said.
Grubby, really.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
A bit like the adaption to the Colonel Bogey march, written in 1914 by a British Army bandmaster:
Bullshitt, that's all the band can play, bullshit, they play it night and day...
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
On this particular issue i feel a name and shame is a good idea
one shop in Dover actually puts pictures up in its windows of people they have banned from them store
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,897
Keith, they have also been told they have to come down, which is a shame.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
JAN;
I don't know if your talking about the same shop in pencester
but they have been up for over a year.
rather surprized if they stop now
maybe our leaders charlie, paulw roger etc can lend support to them to keep the pictures in place
im certain most people would support there retention
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
There could be a legal issue with naming and shaming. If people are banned from a shop they shouldnt be named and shamed unless they have been found guilty of a crime. Otherwise it could be a defamation on their gharacter purely at the will of a shop owner who may dislike them for gawd knows what reason. So there would clearly be a legal issue there. We couldnt name and shame anyone on here for example.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
i'm sure the wording on the pictures is that they have been convicted of shoplifting but i will check to make sure and report back
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,897
Yes, that is the one Keith, maybe my information is out of date or possibly there was a misunderstanding re guilty or not.
I like the idea if they are definitely guilty.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
i will look today hope there still in window
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the wording is caught shoplifting not convicted of shoplifting, i m surprised that the shop gets away with it.
every so often the pictures are taken down then new ones re-emerge.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,897
We would love to do the same with our shoplifters but it would be a waste of police time to get them involved from 50p or £1.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
The law of defamation is quite clear. If an allegation is true it is incapable of being defamatory.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
any allegation has to be accompanied by proof such as a court conviction.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,897
CCTV camera footage should be enough I should think.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
The pics have gone at mo, but like howard says they re appear from time to time.
at the end of the day shouldn't the shopkeeper decide who they want in there shop?
and they get to know the regular shoplifters, so why shouldnt there picture go up.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
two different issues keith, of course any shopkeeper has a right to serve who they like.
making accusations against people is not, unless they have been convicted in a court of law or given an on the spot fine.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,897
There are many that the police and possibly half the neighbourhood know are guilty of crime but are unable to prove it, that does not mean those people innocent.
We bar those we catch.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
howard;l
i do agree with you
and im sure when the photos were in the window they were of p[ersons
convicted of shoplifting
and i applaud the shop for doing so
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS