Spate of burglaries in East Dulwich

[northlondoner]

When I was doing law, past convictions were put only before a jury when the defendant impugned the character of a prosecution witness. Don't know if that's changed. Prunella, I'm interested in those stats about the "barristers briefing defendants " and juries being hoodwinked by smartly dressed, smart talking guilty defendants. Perhaps you'd care to share your source. Oh, and for future reference , there's no "a" in definitely.

[Prunella_Gatsby]

Sorry 'Northlondoner' if i misspelt definitely but i am diagnosed dyslexic, so spelling mistakes will happen, i am trying my best - we're all not perfect like you eh...?

[Sue]

Prunella_Gatsby Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry 'Northlondoner' if i misspelt definitely but

> i am diagnosed dyslexic, so spelling mistakes will

> happen, i am trying my best - we're all not

> perfect like you eh...?

xxxxxx

And your source for the rest of your post?

[northlondoner]

Fair point Prunella - and I accept the rebuke. But as to the substantive point .....?

[Prunella_Gatsby]

Yes of course.

You can find the up to date link/source of a survey of experiences by past defendants below.

P.s You should have an open mind and not always base everything in life on pure stats - yes i agree they are just figures and information , that can meaning nothing or misinterpreted by anyone who wishes to do so.

Hope i have'nt made any spelling mistakes...

Happy reading 'Sue' and 'Northlondoner'

link/sonfomotions.com/etexts/id/etext123711

In case you really love more stats - then you can find more at liberty-human-rights.co.uk and paste in scroll bar the relevant question on Barristers advising defendantsand all the info' will come up.... again happy reading!

[HAL9000]

@Prunella_Gatsby

Congratulations: your link is a Google-wide hapax legomenon.

[Huguenot]

I've never heard anything so idiotic as an insistence that a persons guilt of a crime should be determined according to the crimes they may have committed previously.

Of course they're going to dress smartly - they're hardly going to come in wearing black and white stripes, an eyepatch and a bag marked 'swag' are they?

As for being 'briefed' by a barrister, well duh? Preparation of the client is a key part of the legal process and is a key part of ensuring justice is done.

If you are suggesting that barristers are 'coaching' clients (i.e. telling them what to say) then that is illegal under perjury laws and a breach of the barristers own code of conduct.

As for 'five years means five years', it's just the sort of tub thumping block headedness that you'd expect from a fat conservative politician pre election.

The good behaviour arrangements are a key part of rehabilitation and keeping order within the prison system. You let that slip and the whole thing turns into a riot.

[Sue]

Huguenot (tu)

Hal (tu) :))

[Wombat]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've never heard anything so idiotic as an

> insistence that a persons guilt of a crime should

> be determined according to the crimes they may

> have committed previously.

>

> Of course they're going to dress smartly - they're

> hardly going to come in wearing black and white

> stripes, an eyepatch and a bag marked 'swag' are

> they?

>

> As for being 'briefed' by a barrister, well duh?

> Preparation of the client is a key part of the

> legal process and is a key part of ensuring

> justice is done.

>

> If you are suggesting that barristers are

> 'coaching' clients (i.e. telling them what to say)

> then that is illegal under perjury laws and a

> breach of the barristers own code of conduct.

>

> As for 'five years means five years', it's just

> the sort of tub thumping block headedness that

> you'd expect from a fat conservative politician

> pre election.

>

> The good behaviour arrangements are a key part of

> rehabilitation and keeping order within the prison

> system. You let that slip and the whole thing

> turns into a riot.

Surely not that idiotic... Given that it's used to influence the jury in exactly that way when it's deemed admissible in court.

And you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you believe that a code of conduct is sufficient in preventing a barrister leading a horse to water.

I'm with you on the good behaviour arrangements btw - it's just that the minimum sentencing guidelines are askew.

[MrBen]

Another ED mate broken in to yesterday (Monday) at 7pm in central ED. He got home from work to find the burglar still in his house and after a brief exchange the guy pushed past and ran off down the street. He didn't have anything on him but a lot of stuff had gone so there must have been a second who had just fled the scene with the loot. One other house nearby was also broken into just before, probably the same team.

Pretty brazen breaking in just when everyone's getting back from work on a monday evening. Like the foxes, they don't seem to care anymore!

[the-e-dealer]

Mr Ben can you give us a rough idea of location. quite understand not wanting to say exactly where.

[HAL9000]

This article explains the current law on disclosure: Previous convictions law could be changed

In theory, according to their codes of conduct, solicitors and barristers should not suggest, devise or concoct a defence case for defendants in criminal prosecutions.

However, many leading criminal law solicitors employ non-lawyers such as ex-policemen who are not bound by the codes of conduct and often ensure that defendants know how to avoid making damaging admissions during their trial testimony.

There is a very thin line between a verdict of guilty and not-guilty - one wrong word is often all it takes to swing the balance.

[Wombat]

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This article explains the current law on

> disclosure: Previous convictions law could be

> changed

>

> In theory, according to their codes of conduct,

> solicitors and barristers should not suggest,

> devise or concoct a defence case for defendants in

> criminal prosecutions.

>

> However, many leading criminal law solicitors

> employ non-lawyers such as ex-policemen who are

> not bound by the codes of conduct and often ensure

> that defendants know how to avoid making damaging

> admissions during their trial testimony.

>

> There is a very thin line between a verdict of

> guilty and not-guilty - one wrong word is often

> all it takes to swing the balance.

You have a strong belief in the mystical power of this code of conduct.

[HAL9000]

You have a strong belief in the mystical power of this code of conduct.

Not half! The English criminal legal system conceals its corruptibility from the general public with those very same codes of conduct.

[MrBen]

the-e-dealer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mr Ben can you give us a rough idea of location.

> quite understand not wanting to say exactly where.

Be honest, does it really make a difference where it was? It can and does happen on every street. Unless there are certain specific burglar proof roads I don't know about....just use your mortice / deadlocks!

[James Barber]

At the East Dulwich ward Safer Neighbourhood Team panel - held at ED Police station last Wednesday 18/1 - local Police stated that East Dulwich WARD is bucking the current rising crime trend. Lowest reported crime rate for three years.

That no consolation if you've still been a victim of crime.

They specifically said no Xmas binge occurred of burglaries. During last 4 week 4 residentials burglaries had occurred and over the last 12 weeks 15 residential burglaries and 8 non residentials one. East Dulwich ward has 5,300 homes and about 400 businesses (mostly shops).

They believe this is mostly due to apprehending one person who has not been given bail and property marking kits with recent signage added to lampposts. This person had no historical connection to the area but were housed on licence in the area. The high reoffending rate is national issue but caused local burglary crime. This individual will probably serve 5 years and then be a problem. If anyone/s want to make this person a project to help avoid reoofending that would really help the community - contact me.

During those same 4 weeks - no robberies, 7 vehicles crimes in the WARD. BUT huge increase in common assaults up from 7 to 21 largely due to a massive fight outside The Bishop involving 50 people on Christmas Eve. Amazingly no reference to it on the forum. It appears a group of 4 non locals visited the pub and assaulted a number of people.

[buddug]

James Barber wrote: "At the East Dulwich ward Safer Neighbourhood Team panel - held at ED Police station last Wednesday 18/1 - local Police stated that East Dulwich WARD is bucking the current rising crime trend. Lowest reported crime rate for three years. That no consolation if you've still been a victim of crime."

But then he goes on: "They specifically said no Xmas binge occurred of burglaries... blah blah."

He's doing it again! Someone posts they've been burgled and he immediately jumps in quoting low crime statistics like a broken record. Unbelievable. Please, James, just go away!

[showboat]

buddug Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> James Barber wrote: "At the East Dulwich ward

> Safer Neighbourhood Team panel - held at ED Police

> station last Wednesday 18/1 - local Police stated

> that East Dulwich WARD is bucking the current

> rising crime trend. Lowest reported crime rate for

> three years. That no consolation if you've still

> been a victim of crime."

> But then he goes on: "They specifically said no

> Xmas binge occurred of burglaries... blah blah."

>

> He's doing it again! Someone posts they've been

> burgled and he immediately jumps in quoting low

> crime statistics like a broken record.

> Unbelievable. Please, James, just go away!

You don't like James Barber. We get it. But now you sound like the stuck record.

Stop banging on the man. I don't agree with all he says, but I don't take every chance to call him a liar.

What's so bad about telling people that crime isn't too bad here? As the yanks would say 'why you gotta hate man?'

[showboat]

And why tell him to go away? At least he puts his head above the parapet, knowing it'll get bitten off by one side or the other.

Most politicians hide away. He's still here, engaging with the public. Isn't that what we want them to do, even if we don't like how they vote?

[buddug]

Showboat, do you really think it appropriate for him to play party politics immediately someone reports a burglary on the forum? "Oh yes, look at us LibDems, it's thanks to us that crime is down in East Dulwich, blah blah, statistics, blah, free markers for your belongings, blah blah".

[showboat]

Can't see anywhere in his post that he's saying LibDems are to thank for a lower crime rate. So your comment about party politics looks to me like a Campbell-esque attempt to smear a councillor you hate. That's between you and your conscience. Don't know what you issue with marking kits is either.

But I see no problem with TELLING PEOPLE WHAT THE POLICE HAVE SAID, which is all he did. Being a victim of crime is horrible. But it's good to be reminded that ED isn't too bad in that respect. People on this forum sometimes interpret a couple of burglaries as evidence that the sky is falling down...

All James did was to provide information that originally came from the police. Personally I'm grateful, it's interesting to know.

[the-e-dealer]

Fact is James Barber and the Libcons are not in charge in Southwark . For Council matters You have to praise the Labour Council and also criticise them when things go wrong.

[James Barber]

Hi buggug,

The original poster in October said a spate of burglaries was occurring. It was.

My post was to show that the Police think that this spate has ended in East Dulwich and to give that Police feedback to the community. If you'd stayed last night after the DCC interval you'd have heard our local Police sgt talk about this.

[buddug]

James, I take your point. But it's just that you do it whenever someone originally posts they've been burgled. It's just highly irritating. And I'm afraid I do get a feeling it's more to do with you blowing your own trumpet that as an East Dulwich Ward councillor, you are partly to thank for the statistics going down. I may be wrong.

[showboat]

You are.