http//
Too right. Tried to blame it on the CPS. roll
Ouch, that must have been a fun day in court.
I do not know.
Looking across the pond, I am tired of judges having a "holier than thou" attitude.
I have worked on cases where judges flipped out and had God complex.
Should I ever find a judge telling me I have to do something that is explicitly illegal, I would tell them "do it, hold me in contempt, and will see how the media will set your powdered curly wig on fire"… (How are judges assigned, and for how long?)
In this case, at least in the US, it is beat into our heads, never ever, ever duplicate such material. Do not look in their general direction, do not even display it, do not think about it; do not even breath in their vicinity . . .
So the poor schmuck says "hey I am not allowed to give you stuff like this"… then he gets beat up on the other end.
As I said, I do not know if I agree with the judge raking this guy…
Too right. Tried to blame it on the CPS. roll
Too right?!
Read the full article again and you may find the bit that says "guidance has been issued by ACPO setting out how the defence can be provided with the indecent images or media that has been found."
If the defence is unfit to follow the required prodcedure you can't blame the analyst, let alone threaten him with imprisonment… roll
Too right. Tried to blame it on the CPS. roll
Too right?!
Read the full article again and you may find the bit that says "guidance has been issued by ACPO setting out how the defence can be provided with the indecent images or media that has been found."
If the defence is unfit to follow the required prodcedure you can't blame the analyst, let alone threaten him with imprisonment… roll
Too right.
Read the full article again and you may find the bit that says "guidance has been issued by ACPO setting out how the defence can be provided with the indecent images or media that has been found."
The ACPO guidelines are, as the article says, just guidelines. It's plainly incorrect to hold a industry code of practice as of greater importance than a judge's orders. Expert witnesses are there to serve the court, not the other way round. The Academy of Experts has summed up it very well
"An expert's duty in providing written reports and giving evidence is to help the Court, and that this duty overrides any obligation to the party by whom they are engaged"
I think for those of you across the pond it is worth bearing in mind that it is quite normal for a defence expert to have access to IIoC material. When I did this sort of work I had never had any trouble getting a copy of the images to examine at my premises from any UK police force.
I dont think the issue here is that the judge ordered the release of the images, it is more that the police expert asked for the orders in writing (assuming the press report is correct).
Read the full article again and you may find the bit that says "guidance has been issued by ACPO setting out how the defence can be provided with the indecent images or media that has been found."
The ACPO guidelines are, as the article says, just guidelines. It's plainly incorrect to hold a industry code of practice as of greater importance than a judge's orders. Expert witnesses are there to serve the court, not the other way round.
QFT
Again, I do not understand why the judge would have such a problem with having her words in writing.
That "scrappy piece of paper" can save the the examiner's career when he releases the material.
I am quite sure that she "will not have this bureaucracy" about documentation when it comes to others career. I ask again - how are judges positioned onto a bench in the UK?
Furthermore, if her court is unable to deliver a "scrappy piece of paper", how is it that the examiner is "building in months of delay"? I would say she is blaming the wrong person for her court's inability to process her bureaucracy…
Her chickens come home to roost?
But, then again, I am seeing this from across the pond.
Again, I do not understand why the judge would have such a problem with having her words in writing.
That "scrappy piece of paper" can save the the examiner's career when he releases the material.
I am quite sure that she "will not have this bureaucracy" about documentation when it comes to others career. I ask again - how are judges positioned onto a bench in the UK?
Furthermore, if her court is unable to deliver a "scrappy piece of paper", how is it that the examiner is "building in months of delay"? I would say she is blaming the wrong person for her court's inability to process her bureaucracy…
Her chickens come home to roost?
But, then again, I am seeing this from across the pond.
The judge didn't request he break the law; it was a usual everyday request. Very odd that he refused to comply.
More details here http//
There were two threads to the case
1. The scrappy piece of paper
2. That Kent fight requests to hand over image files to defence experts - to my knowledge nearly all other forces hand them over after a MOU is signed.
It is point 2 that the judge is refering to re months of delay
of course I am basing what i have read on the newspaper articles - so there may be another side to this