Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Case #1 bench orders criminal to keep proceeds of crime

UK blogger Magistrate Bystander has provided in comments some information on ways in which the UK magistrate industry is superior to our own, thus highlighting the stupidity and weaknesses of our own system.

However the acid test is whether a magistrate produces judgements which punish wrongdoers, reflect community expectations, and protect law abiding citizens.

Would one of Bystanders colleagues have pronounced the following judgement?:

A chequebook was stolen from a parked car.
The thief subsequently used the chequebook, forging a signature to match the name of the real owner of the chequebook.
Each cheque was passed at a small corner shop, or other business operated by a husband & wife team, mostly within a 200km radius. Most of the victim businesses could not afford the $300 or thereabouts which the cheque was written for.

At the inevitable prosecution only the use of 33 of the stolen cheques was mentioned.

One of the Thirty-Three stolen/forged cheques was for $200 and presented to a pub in town. Mine Host has no idea which pub, it could have been the Wayside Tavern, it could have been a competitor, the court did not ever elaborate.

The Magistrate's judegement:

"Guilty, no conviction to be recorded, and no restitution to be paid, as until banks serve alcohol, pubs should not cash cheques"

5 comments:

toxic_i said...

Do u find your topic intersting??? I don't!!!!

Ms J said...

i find this interesting tho! and wise words from the gistrate indeed!

oigal said...

A soft,easy and stupid judgements by another "I am so clever" wanker.

Whats the bet he has never had to work of his/her $$ off the taxpayers teat.

John said...

Dear Host,

Would you please provide a link to this case, as it is suspisciously like a sign which hung behind the bar where I first worked.

Love your blog and I promise not to pick a fight.

Judge Higginbotham III QC said...

"However the acid test is whether a magistrate produces judgements which punish wrongdoers, reflect community expectations, and protect law abiding citizens."

No, the acid test is whether they do their job and uphold the law, one crucial consequence of which ought to be the things you describle, assuming appropriate laws have been passed by the legislature.


"Whats the bet he has never had to work of his/her $$ off the taxpayers teat. "

70/30 in favour of the probability that they HAVE worked, um, I think you mean for a private law firm or in business for themselves.

But don't let that stop you from slandering them, you've clearly got a good point which the facts needn't interfere with.