Tens of thousands of rail passengers who were prosecuted and fined for alleged fare evasion after set to be refunded after a judge ruled their convictions were void. Seven train companies, including Northern Rail and Greater Anglia, could face paying out millions of pounds to people who they privately prosecuted for travelling without a ticket.
How did this happen? Well, Reader, would you believe, stunning incompetence in the British justice system?
The railway firms had brought prosecutions against its passengers using the controversial Single Justice Procedure (SJP), despite not being permitted to do so.
And...no-one said 'Wait, hang on a minute..?' at all.
The SJP was set up in 2015 to allow magistrates to decide on minor offences, such as using a television without a licence or driving without car insurance, without defendants going to court. Rail companies were permitted to use the SJP in 2016 to privately prosecute fare evaders, but many have been brought under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which is not allowed under the procedure.
Tom Franklin, the chief executive of the Magistrates' Association, called for reform of the SJP and said 'serious questions' had been raised by the case.
About the competence of magistrates? Yes. Yes, it certainly does.
A Government spokesperson said: 'We acknowledge the Chief Magistrate's judgment and welcome the apology from train operators. While fare evasion should be tackled, the right process should be followed at all times.
'The people affected will be directly contacted in due course to resolve the cases in accordance with the judgment.'
And you aren't worried that the magistrates you employ are morons?
6 comments:
Oh, joy. Now they not only have to refund but if they want to restart the cases it will cost them a fortune. As so often happens, I can see someone being promoted over this . . .
So it was a technichal error. And these people who were prosecuted were actually fare dodgers, and now they are going to get away with it
You'd expect better from our justice system, if you didn't know better
Somewhat unfair, as in completely wrong, on magistrates.
From the government website:
Magistrates do not need to have legal qualifications, they are advised in court on matters of law, practice and procedure. This advice is provided by professional lawyers authorised by the Lord Chief Justice, called justices’ legal advisers (or legal advisers for short).
-- Justin
It gets worse still. By chance I was watching a video on this yesterday by Art of Law, in which he suggests that a large number of people who pled guilty on the Single Justice Procedure form may have been processed en masse.
Art of Law: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i2UkOcPZ94
"As so often happens, I can see someone being promoted over this . . ."
Someone probably already has been.
"And these people who were prosecuted were actually fare dodgers, and now they are going to get away with it"
Yes. But 'better ten guilty go free...' and all that.
"This advice is provided by professional lawyers authorised by the Lord Chief Justice, called justices’ legal advisers (or legal advisers for short)."
Advice that should come with a health warning, these days.
"...in which he suggests that a large number of people who pled guilty on the Single Justice Procedure form may have been processed en masse."
I wonder if that's why none of the rioters have plead not guilty too?
"Yes. But 'better ten guilty go free...' and all that."
True dat
Post a Comment