S14E01 - Power to the Victim

You can listen here!

This week we scrabble around in the mud to bring you a frankly minimal offering of law.  It may have been the silly season but the law has (at least in this country) remained aloof and above such matters.

Sadly this show was recorded before the Lord Chancellor was defeated in the High Court by criminal solicitors using judicial review - a system Grayling would like to seee abolished - and now we can see why.  He acted illegally.  That didn't stop his press office tweeting (like a petulant child) that it wasn't a complete victory for them but they did get to keep the 8.75% cut.  Not that that was the point of this particular action.  He's like this government's Comical Ali.

Nevertheless, the bulk of this week's show does deal with another announcement by Chris Grayling.  He has been electioneering announcing what he's doing for complainants victims.  

So what's new?  In our usual vein, this week Ben brings us a thoughtful report on the MoJ's recent publication.  Regular listeners may think they know where this is going...

If you would like to read the two papers, then they are below.
The 2013 Code of Practice
The 2014 pamphlet


PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.  If you use iTunes, please click here and it'll take just seconds!

S12E04 - All Change! No Change!

On this week's show, which you can listen to by clicking these very words, Ben and Kirstin talk their way through the so-called "revolution" in the family courts.

It is something of an oddity that reforms that actually do very little in terms of changing the status quo and, instead, assume that lawyers have been doing it wrong for all of this time, should be heralded as a "revolution" by a political judge.  Check out the government hype in the links below.

Not content with having a pop at the President of the Family Division's self-congratulation, Ben finds the High Court utterly objectionable as it gives a litigant in person a raw deal and seems to object to justice being done.

Knife crime guidelines get the sharp tongue of Kirstin as we celebrate another Court of Appeal decision that is a little lacking in purpose.

In addition, we have a little look at the cost of getting judicial review wrong - or rather, not turning to the silver bullet that is ADR.

Yes, you may be able to tell that we are feeling more than a little snarky this week.  It might pass.  It might not.

Links:

Law students in divorce courts and putting the children first.
Sir James Munby’s Oscar Speech: http://flba.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014view11-2.doc.docx
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610014/Law-students-drafted-help-resolve-divorce-cases-shake-family-justice-system.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04/23/law-studentstrusted-counselling-divorcing-couples_n_5197804.html
http://www.adjacentgovernment.co.uk/local-government-news/family-justice-reforms-put-childrens-need-first/
http://www.tayloremmet.co.uk/blogs/new-family-court/
THINK OF THE CHILDREN (or “How to use children to push a government austerity agenda" video): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA99gui758I
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/217343/family-justice-review-final-report.pdf

Knife crime guidance.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2014/747.html

The cost of getting it wrong: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2014/11l97.html

Medical excuses and litigants in person getting steamrollered.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/332.html

S11E04 - Of Interest to the Public

Ben and Jonathan get to grips with some matters of public importance this week's show. 


First up is a look at the guidance (in force from February 2014) on the publication of decisions of the family courts and the Court of Protection.  There are some interesting questions raised about how this is going to work and who is paying for it.  

Either way, you'll have to know about this if you work in either of these areas of law and the public may well find the reality of these cases far more challenging than the abstract way in which they are reported at present.

We move on to the case of the "Iceland Three".  This story was all over social media this week.  This was the case of three men who faced prosecution for taking food from a skip at a London branch of London.  There was outrage and a change in CPS approach but, once you factor-in other information that appeared in later reports, did the CPS make the right call or were they duped by the publicity?


Then onto our favourite [redacted for legal purposes], Theresa May.  She has been calling for some powers that, if they were to be used against convicted terrorists, you might think were pretty obvious, but that's not quite what she wants.  We look at the terrible misreporting of this case by almost all UK media.  There is some very scary devil in the detail and Ben issues a personal thanks to his MP, Hazel Blears, for being one of the 297 MPs who played politics with something the UN think is fundamental to a person's very being.


As always, there is stuff that we didn't get to this week.  Please see the show notes below for the links to those stories and for all of the articles for the above.


We'll be back next week when hopefully Kirstin will be back with us and Mr Kipling will have sent us some cake.  Or Iceland might have sent us a prawn ring.  Let's hope it's the former.

You can listen to show by clicking right here but, of course, we'd prefer that you subscribed on iTunes or via Google Play Store or via any good podcatcher app on your phone/tablet.  Ben from Northpod Law particularly recommends this one for Android and iOS.
You can also find us on Stitcher and soon on TuneIn.

Links:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17150054

- The public will get to peer at the decisions of the Family courts and the Court of Protection under the new transparency guidance.

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Guidance/transparency-in-the-family-courts-jan2014.pdf

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2540976/At-victory-secrecy-courts.html

- Skipping case - in the public interest until the public gets interested.

First story: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/28/three-charged-vagrancy-act-food-skip-iceland

Iceland 1st response: http://about.iceland.co.uk/_assets/files/Prosecution-for-waste-food-theft-29-1-14.pdf

CPS decision (as reported in Indie) PLUS the shades of grey appear:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/iceland-food-bin-theft-case-dropped-by-cps-9094415.html

Iceland 2nd statement:

http://about.iceland.co.uk/_assets/files/Update-on-Kentish-Town-waste-food-theft-29-1-14.pdf

- Theresa May and the race to the bottom on Immigration toughness leads to 11th-hour amendment to bill to include right to strip naturalised Brits of their nationality.

What does ILPA say? They say not within scope.

http://www.ilpa.org.uk/data/resources/25742/14-01-29-Deprivation-ILPA-briefing.pdf

Blog:

http://www.freemovement.org.uk/2014/01/30/amendment-to-immigration-bill-allows-home-secretary-to-make-people-stateless/#more-12265

Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/29/theresa-may-terror-suspects-citizenship-clegg-approval

Not just “terrorism suspects” or “terrorists” at all.  Read the section (at page 1651):

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2013-2014/0128/amend/pbc1283001m.1649-1655.html

Actual reasons for Home Sec simply to be satisfied of are:

Home Sec satisfied that it is conducive to the public good because that person has conducted himself in such a manner that is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK.  

AND if it’s a decision taken

then there will be no public information as to why the decision has been made and there will be no right of appeal.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/61/section/40A

Not just May, of course.  100 MPs support this, including Hazel Blears.

Further reading/”No time for” stories

- 17 y.o. death at YOI Wetherby

http://www.inquest.org.uk/media/pr/serious-failures-identified-by-jury-inquest-17-year-old-ryan-clark-wetherby

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/failings-wetherby-prison-blamed-17-year-old-ryan-clarks-death-1434271

- Even those terps who scabbed and went to work for Capita are now calling for a boycott.  This is because Capita has finally scrapped Tier 2/3 terps and so the power is now in the hands of the Tier 1s.

http://www.linguistlounge.org/all-articles/analysis-and-comment/999-time-to-take-action-boycott#comments

Premier League IP case:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-25968200

But, in Feb 2012

S11E03 - Dangerously Out Of Control

You can listen to show by clicking right here but, of course, we'd prefer that you subscribed on iTunes or via Google Play Store or via any good podcatcher app on your phone/tablet.  Ben from Northpod Law particularly recommends this one for Android and iOS.

The Court of Appeal recently took the opportunity to set straight a peculiarity in the law that has existed since 1991.  Most criminal lawyers will have dealt with the scenario with which the court was concerned and the Court of Appeal have used their powers of statutory interpretation to fix what most would see as a terribly unfair and poorly-drafted bit of legislation: the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

It had appeared, until recently, that s.3(1) of the 1991 Act had created an offence whereby you could go to prison for up to two years even if you did nothing wrong.  It is unlikely that this case will be overturned any time soon as it needed fixing but see what you think about it.

The case and some other reading material are below.

Then we move on to our second case of the week; in fact, it's one of Mr Knight's.

The appeal against sentence of Connor Martin was described as an exceptional case by the Court of Appeal because it dealt with the unusual scenario of a Crown Court Judge giving an express indication of what sentence would be imposed after a Newton hearing and then imposing a higher sentence.  The case was regarding legitimate expectation and gives the strongest indication that judges should never give such indications prior to the decision being taken to hold a Newton hearing.  

We do have a quick look at the QASA judicial review decision of the High Court but it contained few surprises.  We promised in the show that we would give you a link to a good set of reactions to the decision.  It is in the links below.

Links

A very important precedent has been set in Dangerous Dogs cases.  The strict liability offence of having a dog dangerously out of control in a public place has just had a much-needed caveat added to it by the Court of Appeal.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2013/2396.html

(http://www.solicitorsjournal.com/case-reports/animals-regina-v-robinson-pierre)

(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2264113/Symieon-Robinson-Pierre-Dog-owner-sentenced-22-months-failing-stop-dog-mauling-police-officers.html)

R v Martin [2013] http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2013/2565.html

Reactions to QASA: http://www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk/qasa-criminal-barristers-react-to-rejected-challenge/

S10E04 - Back-pats and Knock-backs

Listen to the show right here.

This week, we are taking a look at how the Probation Service are doing when it comes to looking after victims of crime when an offender is coming up for release. The MoJ thinks it's all pretty good but the report is not exactly a clean bill of health.

The High Court has to get stuck in to the issue of access to a solicitor when you are arrested in relation to terrorism.

Kirstin takes us through the objective and subjective elements of self-defence when the defendant believes that he was being threatened by evil spirits.

We take a whistlestop look at how finding money lying around might be a good thing but handing it in to police is unlikely to get you anywhere.

What happens when the prosecution appeals against a decision at Crown Court to kick a case out at half-time? Listen and learn.

All that in a jam-packed show this week.

We are very grateful to Ash Raveendran for her help on this week's show. She's out there looking for pupillage, you know...

Links

Probation Service is doing just fine with Victim Contact.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/inspectorate-reports/hmiprobation/joint-thematic/victim-contact-report.pdf

Terror law suspects must have access to solicitor at any time, High Court rules.

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/terror-suspects-entitled-to-solicitor/5038611.article

Defendant appealing against conviction – Whether insanely held delusion on part of defendant being attacked or threatened causing him to respond violently entitling him to acquittal on basis of reasonable self-defence.

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/law-reports/criminal-law/5038442.article

No such thing as free money.

Steven Fletcher -and- CC of Leicestershire Constabulary [2013] EWHC 3357 (Admin)

Successful pros appeal against finding of no case to answer.

R v Bor [2013] EWCA Crim 1916

Other stuff:

What lawyers are (not) doing in their bedrooms:

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/london-lawyers-are-spicing-up-their-love-lives-and-george-clooney-is-following-suit-8926112.html

NAPO announcement of intention to work to rule:

http://www.napo.org.uk/about/news/news.cfm/newsid/318

S09E06 - Forced Marriages

A cake and bourbon show with no cake.  Or bourbon.  Or Ben.  Or Jonathan.

What we do have though is an in depth look at the work of the family courts of England and Wales with a particular focus on the increasingly common issue of forced marriages.

Have a listen right here.

Joining Kirstin this week (actually in Podcast Towers for a change!) is Joseph Lynch.  He is a family law specialist whose work mainly involves public law cases - where a local authority is seeking to remove the child from the custody of the parents.

Joe can be contacted via his chambers, Central Chambers.

We will be back in <cough> six weeks with a new series.  Series 10 is quite likely to end with a party.  What do you say?  Fancy joining us for a few sneaky drinks at a live show?  Let us know on the Twitter, Google+, email or on 0161 408 5037

Some other stories for which we did not have time this week:

Grayling turns on yet another “valued partner”. Serco this time.

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/moj-calls-in-police-over-serco-fraud-claims/5037199.article

...but refuses to back down on Legal Aid destruction.

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/areas-of-law/legal-aid-and-access-to-justice/grayling-refuses-to-delay-legal-aid-cuts/5037170.article

Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Orders or Suspected sex offender restraining orders

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23844385

Jonathan Rayner, writing in the Law Society Gazette, quotes Law Society criminal law committee chair Richard Atkinson told me: ‘It is a dangerous move to take away the requirement for a conviction to make a restrictive order, not least because the order will be interpreted as proof that you committed the offence and that you are indeed a paedophile.

‘Also, if you resort to litigation to resist the restrictions, you are effectively telling the prosecution in advance how you intend to conduct your defence – giving the prosecution two bites of the cherry.’

Also, keep a lookout for a new law-based podcast, coming soon on the Northpod network of podcasts.  Don't worry as we will add the new show to your podcast feed automatically when it's available so you don't miss out.

S09E03 - Mind Your Language?

This week's show (listen here) is brought to you courtesy of predatory comments made at Snaresbrook Crown Court and via Blackstones Criminal Law July Updater.

Ben talks to Kate Hammond, former CPS Crown Advocate and to Keith Jones, both Barristers in Private Practice at Central Chambers in Manchester. They discuss the recent and much publicised use of the term "sexual predator" by Prosecuting Counsel, in relation to a 13-year-old victim.

Kirstin joins Ben then to go through some interesting cases with differing bizarreness rating.  We answer the questions:
1. Whether it matters if you thought you were indulging in sex with a girl or a boy- R v McNally
2. Whether you can do an act which intimidates without intimidating - R v ZN
3. What is the exact time the Defence are aware of a witness for the purpose of witness notification?
                                                                                                                            - Re Joseph Hill and Co
4. Whether the Jury need to know for what a SOPO was imposed. - Sheikh [2013] EWCA Crim 907
and
5. When is the prosecution allowed to rely on their witness being a good egg? - R v Lodge

If you'd like to view the vulnerable witness handling video please click here.

And if you're following the 13-year-old case controversy and have run out of reading matter you might find some new stuff in this lot:

News articles:

http://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/news/crime-court/schoolgirl_13_branded_sexual_predator_by_judge_who_spared_romford_paedophile_jail_1_2321573

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/judge-calls-victim-13-a-sexual-predator-outcry-as-41yearold-man-walks-free-after-admitting-sex-with-girl-8748494.html

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/aug/07/barrister-victim-predatory-criticised-dpp

CPS guidance:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/consultations/csa_consultation_summary.html

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/derogatory_or_defamatory_mitigation/#a06

Pressure Group against “ostensible consent” as a concept: http://yhndm.co.uk/Main/why-children-can-t-consent.html

S09E01 - "Oh you can tell by the way I use my walk..."

Welcome back!  You can listen here.

Last series it was Jonathan Holt in a cell in Thailand.  This series it's Ben Knight involved in diamond smuggling - honestly is there only me left as a law abiding legal type?

We kick the series off with the topic of gait identification - if it walks like a duck is apparently enough now.  We talk about why a podiatrist is likely to qualify as an expert and give practical tips on how you challenge the evidence if you have to

We also have a bit of a row about children and pornography and what can and ought to be done to prevent them viewing it.  This is in light of government proposals leaked to the BBC to have the parental controls "default on."

In other news: the effects of cuts on the listing system and a big, "well done to Serco and G4S" for allegedly providing Chris Grayling with a real cost saving scheme.  They can just stop over-charging him according to the Lord Chancellor.

Congratulations to Tony Cross QC who will be the 1st Chair of the Criminal Bar Association to not come from a London Set and to Alison Saunders who will be the 1st DPP to be selected from the CPS's own ranks.

NorthPod Law.  It's all about firsts.

S08E05 - Legally Speaking

Click here to listen to the show.

On this week's show, we look into the use of interpreters in courts and police stations and find out why a Ministry of Justice contract with Applied Language Solutions Ltd (now known as Capita Translation and Interpreting Ltd) is causing concern for interpreters, courts and parties to proceedings.

We speak with Mirela Watson, a Romanian interpreter with over a decade of experience and qualifications, about what is wrong with the present system and where the dangers lie.

If you want to read the BBC article about the Snaresbrook case, it is here.
The Court of Appeal decision referred to is here.
The place to register your concerns about cases such as those discussed is here.
We will bring you Capita's response in next week's show, if we receive comment.

The "Justice for Sale" meeting in London on 22nd May 2013 is now sold out.  That's more than 1,100 people and a significant press following.  We will be covering the event (all things being equal!).  The press release from the CLSA, confirming the sell-out, is here.

There are some clues as to the details of some of the Home Secretary's plans for criminal justice, following her address at the Police Federation conference in Bournemouth.  The M.E.N. also had this to say.

We have what might be the last Abu Qatada update from Jonathan Holt.

We all do some agreeing with the Home Secretary about a couple of things.  Don't worry; normal service will be resumed by next week.

In next week's show, coverage of the London "Justice For Sale" event and the protest demo in Manchester. And maybe some cake and bourbon.

S08E04 - The Queen's Speech

Here's the show

It's all a bit political this week as Ben and Kirstin and regular contributor Jonathan Holt discuss what the Queen's Speech contained for Lawyers.

Jonathan worries about the implications of the proposed immigration bill.  Ben worries about the implications of the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill and Kirstin just worries...

Thanks to the BBC for the easy-reading summary, saving us from producing one - our listeners can find it with it's helpful extra links... here.