Developing

Yahoo!. Now with Friends.

Discover news, videos and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Supreme Court To Hear Appeal Of Bail Ruling

    Police have been granted permission to appeal to the Supreme Court to reverse a ruling that could see tens of thousands of violent criminals escape prosecution.

    The controversial ruling, made by a district judge and backed by the High Court on Wednesday , declared suspects could not be on bail for longer than 96 hours.

    It said that once the four days is up, they would have to charge or release the suspect and could only re-arrest them if any new evidence comes to light.

    The move sparked fears policing will be drastically hindered and the Supreme Court has now agreed to hear an appeal on July 25.

    The announcement came after Policing Minister Nick Herbert told MPs the Government would urgently bring forward emergency legislation to overturn it.

    Mr Herbert said the issue was of "grave concern" and warned there was not enough time to wait for the appeal to the Supreme Court .

    The minister said urgent action was needed because the judgment would have a "serious impact" on the police's ability to investigate crime.

    "We cannot, must not and will not ask the police to do their work with one hand tied behind their backs," he said.

    Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper claimed the Government should have acted sooner.

    "There has been considerable chaos in the Home Office around this, not just this week but for the last few weeks," she told Mr Herbert.

    Mr Herbert admitted officials were told of the oral judgment in May but said its full impact only became clear when the written judgment was handed down on June 17 and ministers were alerted on June 24.

    He said emergency legislation will "clarify the position and provide assurance that the police can continue to operate on the basis they have been operating for many years".

    He added: "This judgment upsets a careful balance which has stood for a quarter of a century and impedes the police from doing their job. That is why it must be reversed."

    The ruling came from Salford Magistrates Court where a judge decided murder suspect Paul Hookaway could not be held for further questioning because the application to detain him for 36 hours expired months before, even though officers released him after 28.

    The approach was then backed by the High Court but has consequences for thousands of other cases.

    Estimates suggest up to 80,000 people are currently on bail and could be affected, prompting fears thousands of criminals may not be questioned enough for the cases to be taken to court.

    Chief constable Sir Norman Bettison, from West Yorkshire Police , said on Wednesday that officers were "running around like headless chickens" as they sought to understand the implications of the decision.

    "It's on the verge of a disaster now because the question being asked by my custody sergeants is, 'what do we do, boss?'

    "I cannot countenance turning people away from the charge office and telling them all bets are off and they are free to go," he said.

    James Welch, legal director for the civil rights group Liberty, said: "Being out on bail pending investigation is not the equivalent of being detained.

    "Limits on the time that suspects can be held in police custody are necessary but there are good reasons why the police should be allowed to bail suspects for more than 96 hours."

     

    17 comments

    • Rasher  •  8 months ago
      SO CRIME DOES PAY AFTER ALL.................................................
    • Angry man  •  8 months ago
      Who makes the laws in this country the government or the district judge, I always thought that a judge was there to see that the laws where upheld and respected by all not to change them at will.
    • JD  •  8 months ago
      The hard pressed working taxpayers of England should not hold their breath to wait for any form of common sense or justice from our legal system.

      It is there only to ...

      1. Keep the plebs in apprehension and fear (not criminals)
      2. Keep the Liberal Elite legal eagles rich. including the champagne socialists
      3. Ensure yet another method is used to grind down the traditions of this country
    • KINGSLEY  •  8 months ago
      Criminals and miscreants, with the help of the Human Rights Lobby and Liberty, seem to rule the roost; and the law abiding citizens of this country are treated with contempt
    • Reniklaf  •  8 months ago
      I am frankly surprised that a merer Magistrates Court should be at liberty to issue such a ruling. I unerstood that the goverment made the laws and that judges were there to make sure they were abibded by. Who does this upstart judge think he is?, GOD? ( Ibet his wife wears the trousers at home!!!)
    • VOCALVOTER  •  8 months ago
      What men are these who live in such ivory towers? Oh England, fairest of all, what evils do these knaves and charlatans plot against thee.
    • Alex  •  8 months ago
      Another case of our ridiculous crazy judges.
    • aby5s  •  8 months ago
      anyone knows what this means for the 80,00+ peeps out on bail at the moment?
    • Wacker  •  8 months ago
      One would hope that we haave a severe outbreak of common sense.
    • Jay  •  8 months ago
      guess more motorists will be picked on so they still hit performance targets
    • DAVID  •  8 months ago
      I think the time has come to deal with our judges who are either out of touch or are being deliberately stupid for reasons I do not understand
    • Charleyboy  •  8 months ago
      Who are these idiots who make these decisions? This country seems to be increasingly being taken over by unbalanced retards.
    • ROGER  •  8 months ago
      It is the law that application for extentions must be made in certain time limits. The judge was correct that the application was made months after therefore and there was no power to extend detention. The police released the man on bail following 28 hours of questioning, 8 hours before they had to and felt no need to extend the questioning at that time. The man can be rearrested if new evidence comes to light. It is right and fair that the police should not be able to play cat and mouse with the arrestee in the absence of evidence. If they have insufficient evidence to charge and no further evidence to charge months later. The real question is should the police have arrested in the first place or questioned without arrest ontil they had accumulated sufficient evidence for a chance to charge before arrest. Why do we have so many people on bail without charge for so long ?
    • DEREK W  •  7 months ago
      just proves once again that the judiciary are on the side of the criminal....
    • Stephen  •  8 months ago
      Until we (Britain) joined up to what has now become the EU there was no such office in England as a District Judge. This title is bestowed by the EU and these judges are sworn to rule in favour of the planned EU Supranational state, i.e. Their planned country called EUROPE. Any judgement to the detriment of the nation state is passed. Divide and conquer is their mantra. I know that the people of BRITAIN will awake and demand the return of our sovereignty - our right to govern ourselves without overmighty unelected judges dictating what's-what. These people are Traitors' and if I had judgement they would be treat as such - if you get my drift.
    • william  •  8 months ago
      i think this particular hoo,ha is just a smoke screen to distract people from noticing that,legal aid is being stopped soon...yes it is,look for yourself!
    • E  •  8 months ago
      Judge is absolutely right, if the incompetent police can't get it right in 96 hours it's their fault