Quote:
Originally Posted by xenon
It's aimed at those loophole solicitors who defend mega-rich footballers on some obscure technicality. Having dropped the case the slimy lawyer submits his huge expenses.
Whilst it's true the CPS should stop bringing faulty prosecutions these lawyers will always find something if their client is rich enough.
I'm in two minds about it.
|
If the 'loophole' lawyer wins the case, then the defendant is innocent. Thats the end of it.
Innocent until proven guilty is an absolutely fundamental part of english law. If the CPS consider that the risk of losing and incurring costs is significant then they should not bring the case.
A fixed penalty notice for a speeding offence effectively means that the authorities have evidence (which they will only disclose in the event of court action) that a crime has been committed. The defendent is made a conditional offer of a lower sentence (3 points and £60) in return for making an early admission of guilt.
If you are innocent you have no choice but to elect for a court hearing. In doing so you risk greater punishment if found guilty. This latest suggestion would mean that your cost will be non-recoverable.
In reality, this can only mean that innocent people will accept fixed penalty notices. No-one is going to incur £1000 in costs to avoid the payment of a £60 fine - unless their license is at risk.
This would create a hugely unjust system. The good news is it isn't going to happen, because it is clearly a stupid idea.