Idris Francis ECHR decision
09 June 2007, 09:49 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Idris Francis ECHR decision
I know that some were following the attempts by Idris to have extracting a confession to a motoring crime under duress declared illegal in Europe and at last we have a date for the ruling.
If it all goes to plan then the ruling should be made available at 0830 on Friday 29th June. The plan is that a summary will be given by the President of the ECHR and the ruling should be available on the ECHR site a little later:
European Court of Human Rights - Home page / Accueil - Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme
Idris is optimistic that the ruling will go in his favour but, as I am sure many are aware, there may well have been a lot of political horse trading going on in the background on this one and so some sort of compromise wording is possible.
Hope this isn't SIAL but I haven't had much time for SN of late, it has been a busy time for those looking to uphold our freedoms.
If it all goes to plan then the ruling should be made available at 0830 on Friday 29th June. The plan is that a summary will be given by the President of the ECHR and the ruling should be available on the ECHR site a little later:
European Court of Human Rights - Home page / Accueil - Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme
Idris is optimistic that the ruling will go in his favour but, as I am sure many are aware, there may well have been a lot of political horse trading going on in the background on this one and so some sort of compromise wording is possible.
Hope this isn't SIAL but I haven't had much time for SN of late, it has been a busy time for those looking to uphold our freedoms.
19 June 2007, 12:35 PM
#7
Is anyone else 99% certain that this will go AGAINST Idris Francis?
I just can't see the UK, French and other governments allowing it to stand. There's bound to have been some horse trading and underhand dealings, this IS New Labour we're talking about here.
A bit like the judge who recently ruled AGAINST people recaliming bank charges, dispite the fact that everything says he shouldn't have, and the bank never even turned up to the hearing
Money talks. It will have talked to the ECHR too
Alcazar
I just can't see the UK, French and other governments allowing it to stand. There's bound to have been some horse trading and underhand dealings, this IS New Labour we're talking about here.
A bit like the judge who recently ruled AGAINST people recaliming bank charges, dispite the fact that everything says he shouldn't have, and the bank never even turned up to the hearing
Money talks. It will have talked to the ECHR tooAlcazar
Trending Topics
25 June 2007, 02:26 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More details of what Idris intends to do on the day:
Verdict in EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Application Nos: 15809/02 and 25624/02
O'HALLORAN and FRANCIS v the UK over the right to silence in S172 1988 RTA (speed camera law)
The verdict on these two closely related applications over the breach of the right to silence inherent in S172 1988 Road Traffic Act will be announced shortly after 9.30am at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg - 8.30 am UK time.
There is likely to be a great deal of media interest in this case, as there was at the time of the oral hearing in Strasbourg on 27 September 2006, because S172 is used approximately 10,000 times a day to obtain under duress the names of drivers who have triggered speed cameras. A ruling in favour of the applicants, might well make confessions obtained in this way inadmissable in evidence.
Idris Francis, one of the applicants, and Paul Smith of Safe Speed will hold a press conference from
7.00am at the Royal Air Force Club, Piccadilly, London. In advance of the announcement of the verdict, barrister Michael Shrimpton will speak about the legal issues and Idris Francis and Paul Smith will present evidence to show how the abject failure of speed camera policy has been systematically misrepresented by the authorities but also how the DfT has all but ignored for more than four years a far more cost effective alternative to cameras that does not involve persecuting drivers or breaching fundamental rights.
Time will be set aside for questions, answers and interviews, before and after the verdict is known.
Verdict in EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Application Nos: 15809/02 and 25624/02
O'HALLORAN and FRANCIS v the UK over the right to silence in S172 1988 RTA (speed camera law)
The verdict on these two closely related applications over the breach of the right to silence inherent in S172 1988 Road Traffic Act will be announced shortly after 9.30am at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg - 8.30 am UK time.
There is likely to be a great deal of media interest in this case, as there was at the time of the oral hearing in Strasbourg on 27 September 2006, because S172 is used approximately 10,000 times a day to obtain under duress the names of drivers who have triggered speed cameras. A ruling in favour of the applicants, might well make confessions obtained in this way inadmissable in evidence.
Idris Francis, one of the applicants, and Paul Smith of Safe Speed will hold a press conference from
7.00am at the Royal Air Force Club, Piccadilly, London. In advance of the announcement of the verdict, barrister Michael Shrimpton will speak about the legal issues and Idris Francis and Paul Smith will present evidence to show how the abject failure of speed camera policy has been systematically misrepresented by the authorities but also how the DfT has all but ignored for more than four years a far more cost effective alternative to cameras that does not involve persecuting drivers or breaching fundamental rights.
Time will be set aside for questions, answers and interviews, before and after the verdict is known.
25 June 2007, 02:38 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Friday 29th June.
A date the whole country can be disappointed in.
As said above. Political wranglings will/have been going on for this not to fall into our favour.
Didn't the european courts rule in favour of our government on something else recently? Can't remember what, but our government won.
A date the whole country can be disappointed in.
As said above. Political wranglings will/have been going on for this not to fall into our favour.
Didn't the european courts rule in favour of our government on something else recently? Can't remember what, but our government won.
25 June 2007, 04:21 PM
#11
I can't comment on the above, but I DO know that one of the basic tenets of the new EC legislation that Bliar just signed up to, (you know, the not-a-constitution that we WON'T get a referendum on), the right to strike, has been left out for citizens of the UK.
That's the sort of thing that makes me expect nowt from this government, and nowt from Europe.
Alcazar
That's the sort of thing that makes me expect nowt from this government, and nowt from Europe.
Alcazar
25 June 2007, 07:55 PM
#13
They are a bunch of money grabbing weaseling, lying, cheating GITS. Expect the worst from them, you'll not be disappointed
Alcazar
25 June 2007, 09:52 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Don't care. The UK governemnt NEVER loses stuff like this, and even if they do, they'll either opt out or change the law, post dating it, overnight.
They are a bunch of money grabbing weaseling, lying, cheating GITS. Expect the worst from them, you'll not be disappointed
Alcazar
They are a bunch of money grabbing weaseling, lying, cheating GITS. Expect the worst from them, you'll not be disappointed
Alcazar
Dave
25 June 2007, 11:14 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad to see the Snet Massive voting for the ECHR when most of threads on here slag off our weak Government for caving into the ECHR on too many issues of a PC nature!
Oh the irony!
Oh the irony!
26 June 2007, 08:04 AM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
26 June 2007, 09:45 AM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 June 2007, 09:56 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
Well the media (bbc) never give any peference to Safe Speed or the ABD, but always give loads of airtime to nutjobs like Transport 2000, and Brake - so I can't see the 'press conference' gaining much if any airtime unless the above mentioned nutters are spouting off.
Sad but true........
Sad but true........
26 June 2007, 11:54 AM
#22
I believe any news that doesn't fit in with the political agenda will be burried under Gordon the moron taking over from Bliar headlines.
Hedgehog - good to see you back online fella
26 June 2007, 12:35 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't care. The UK governemnt NEVER loses stuff like this, and even if they do, they'll either opt out or change the law, post dating it, overnight.
They are a bunch of money grabbing weaseling, lying, cheating GITS. Expect the worst from them, you'll not be disappointed
Alcazar
They are a bunch of money grabbing weaseling, lying, cheating GITS. Expect the worst from them, you'll not be disappointed
Alcazar
Les
26 June 2007, 02:43 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
We would all gladly see drunk drivers/car theives/hit and runners executed at dawn, and yet here's a poster condoning someone's frankly idiotic attempt to avoid prosecution on a technicality for a motoring offence that, wait for it, they actually commited.
So what happens where the guilty party can hide behind the hoped for "i'm not telling and you can't make me" ruling, when it is ultimately argued that it applies to a case of, say, death by dangerous. Or car theft and, would you believe it, everyone is a passenger in a driverless car?
It is "pish" like this that mushrooms into greater rights for the guilty and and less for the victims, all in the name of "human ****ing rights"
Anyway, rant over and I hope the Court says **** you Mr Idris
26 June 2007, 04:03 PM
#26
Well, I could agree with your rant if it weren't for the FACT that the ONLY crime the police WILL pursue you to the very limit of the law, and FORCE you to say who was driving, is SPEEDING. But it's NOT about revenue, oh no
Now unless you actually HAVE caused an accident, it's a victimless crime.
But watch what happens if someone hits your car and b*ggers off. Inform police, they can't PROVE who was driving, case dropped.
Alcazar
But it's NOT about revenue, oh noNow unless you actually HAVE caused an accident, it's a victimless crime.
But watch what happens if someone hits your car and b*ggers off. Inform police, they can't PROVE who was driving, case dropped.
Alcazar
26 June 2007, 04:03 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on Devildog - I have lost count of the other threads bemoaning how the guilty have got away because of 'PC' human rights technicalities forced down upon us by Strasbourg.
This thread is a hoot!
This thread is a hoot!
26 June 2007, 04:05 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I could agree with your rant if it weren't for the FACT that the ONLY crime the police WILL pursue you to the very limit of the law, and FORCE you to say who was driving, is SPEEDING. But it's NOT about revenue, oh no
Now unless you actually HAVE caused an accident, it's a victimless crime.
But watch what happens if someone hits your car and b*ggers off. Inform police, they can't PROVE who was driving, case dropped.
Alcazar
But it's NOT about revenue, oh noNow unless you actually HAVE caused an accident, it's a victimless crime.
But watch what happens if someone hits your car and b*ggers off. Inform police, they can't PROVE who was driving, case dropped.
Alcazar
PS If some hits your car and buggers off it is usually because they don't know which car it is never mind who was driving
26 June 2007, 04:31 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue is that ECHR has made a mockery of certain aspects of UK law but now the one time people expect that it can be used to stop authorities breaking the law , that is breaking EXISTING UK Laws there will be no support from ECHR.
The other issue is how much attention the UK gets from ECHR for minor things while countries like Poland and the baltic states have serious problems with institutionised racism and homophobia and there is barely more than lip service to deal the problems. where genuine inequality is rife.
The other issue is how much attention the UK gets from ECHR for minor things while countries like Poland and the baltic states have serious problems with institutionised racism and homophobia and there is barely more than lip service to deal the problems. where genuine inequality is rife.