UK and Europe · Public discussion

Some clarification could be good..

Started by David Martin · · Last activity · 12 posts · 431 views

← Back to UK and Europe

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postSome clarification could be good..David Martin · 11 Aug 2006 02 / This pagePosts 1–12Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #12Rob Morley · 12 Aug 2006

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
11 August 2006
Last activity
12 August 2006
Original author
David Martin
Posts
12
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
431
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–12 of 12
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    David Martin
    Archived post
    #1

    This might inspire some of you in light of recent events...

    ---
    The Clerk to Bruce Morgan
    Bridgnorth & Telford Magistrates Court
    Telford Square
    Malinsgate
    Telford
    Shropshire TF3 4HX

    Dear Sir

    R v Cadden
    Heard 7 August 2006

    I write with reference to the above case.

    I was interested to learn through the Shropshire Star of your judgment
    in this matter, namely that cycling in the road is a criminal offence
    where cycle facilities are provided.

    As a trainee solicitor, I am keen to avoid any criminal activity for
    which I could face prosecution. Perhaps you would be kind enough to
    clarify for me how close a cycle facility must be to the road in order
    to avoid committing an offence. In particular, I am concerned that I
    would be acting unlawfully by cycling on a road when a cycle route is
    available, even if this is not actually next to the road. I would also
    be keen to know whether, where using such a route involves a detour,
    how much further, in your opinion, the route would need to be to render
    it disproportionate, thus allowing me to use the road?

    I would be most grateful for your thoughts on this issue, and await
    your reply with considerable interest.

    Yours faithfully

    ---

    Report
  2. Simon Mason
    Archived post
    #2

    "David Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:

    Heard 7 August 2006

    I write with reference to the above case.

    I was interested to learn through the Shropshire Star of your judgment
    in this matter, namely that cycling in the road is a criminal offence
    where cycle facilities are provided.

    The reply will be along the lines of
    Dear Sir,
    I am afraid we cannot comment on individual cases etc etc.

    --
    Simon Mason
    http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

    Report
  3. Email address hidden
    Archived post
    #3
    David Martin said:


    As a trainee solicitor,

    As a trainee solicitor you should know that this deicison is not
    binding on any other court and a better use of you time would offering
    your services to Mr Cadden to help him appeal this decision.

    More likely to be useful than a pompous letter that is unlikely to get
    anything other than a brush off reply

    Report
  4. Brian G
    Archived post
    #4
    Quoted message said:
    David Martin said:

    As a trainee solicitor,

    As a trainee solicitor you should know that this deicison is not
    binding on any other court and a better use of you time would offering
    your services to Mr Cadden to help him appeal this decision.

    More likely to be useful than a pompous letter that is unlikely to get
    anything other than a brush off reply

    If Mr Cadden appeals, as I hope he feels able to do, I greatly hope he
    has more than a trainee solicitor to assist him.

    --
    Brian G

    Report
  5. John
    Archived post
    #5

    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    David Martin said:


    As a trainee solicitor,

    As a trainee solicitor you should know that this deicison is not
    binding on any other court and a better use of you time would offering
    your services to Mr Cadden to help him appeal this decision.

    More likely to be useful than a pompous letter that is unlikely to get
    anything other than a brush off reply

    Why do you think the letter is pompous. Is claiming the exalted position of
    trainee solicitor pompous? Or is it pompous to be able to write clearly.

    I too think he will receive a brush off but that will just be because people
    don't like being shown the negative consequences of their decisions.

    Report
  6. Al C-F
    Archived post
    #6
    Quoted message said:
    David Martin said:

    As a trainee solicitor,

    As a trainee solicitor you should know that this deicison is not
    binding on any other court and a better use of you time would offering
    your services to Mr Cadden to help him appeal this decision.

    More likely to be useful than a pompous letter that is unlikely to get
    anything other than a brush off reply

    What an unutterably stupid reply.

    Whether the decision is binding or not, the OP is seeking guidance on
    avoiding a criminal record, which would affect his future career. This
    is a perfectly valid line of questioning.

    Report
  7. Email address hidden
    Archived post
    #7
    Al C-F said:


    What an unutterably stupid reply.

    Whether the decision is binding or not, the OP is seeking guidance on
    avoiding a criminal record, which would affect his future career. This
    is a perfectly valid line of questioning.

    which just goes to show how ignorant you are of the English legal
    system.

    Magistrates, like judges, do not respond to letters questioning their
    decisions otherwise they would not have time to make any other
    decisions. That's why we have an appeal system.

    If the OP wants to seek guidance then he needs to look higher than a
    district judge (who admittedly is off his rocker over this one from
    what I have seen)

    Report
  8. Email address hidden
    Archived post
    #8
    John said:


    Why do you think the letter is pompous. Is claiming the exalted position of
    trainee solicitor pompous? Or is it pompous to be able to write clearly.

    It's pompous because he knows (or should know) that it will be of no
    effect and all he wants to do is show off in this forum

    Quoted message said:

    I too think he will receive a brush off but that will just be because people
    don't like being shown the negative consequences of their decisions.


    No - because the judiciary don't answer questions about their
    decisions, they leave to appeal courts to decide if they were right or
    wrong.

    I too think the district judge got this one 100% wrong but I don't
    thinkm he is going to lose any sleep over it

    Report
  9. David Hansen
    Archived post
    #9

    On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:28:47 +0100 someone who may be [email hidden]
    wrote this:-

    Quoted message said:

    I too think the district judge got this one 100% wrong but I don't
    thinkm he is going to lose any sleep over it

    He certainly isn't going to if he is not challenged.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh
    I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
    http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

    Report
  10. Nick Kew
    Archived post
    #10
    Quoted message said:

    No - because the judiciary don't answer questions about their
    decisions, they leave to appeal courts to decide if they were right or
    wrong.

    I too think the district judge got this one 100% wrong but I don't
    thinkm he is going to lose any sleep over it

    You don't become a judge - even the lowest form (a district judge) -
    without having "the right attitude". That doesn't mean they all
    have similar views or reach the same decisions. But it *does* mean
    they must have left far behind any idealistic notions that their
    profession has anything to do with justice, other than in name.
    Or any inclination to care about ruining an innocent person's life.
    And you know very well that your word is (literally) law, and that
    (unlike a politician or bureaucrat), your decision *absolutely*
    cannot be challenged - or even criticised[1] - except through the
    same corrupt system - more individuals with "the right attitude".

    [1] OK, you can criticise a judges decision. But try and do so
    in a publication with anything to lose, like a newspaper, and
    most editors value their freedom and jobs too much to publish.
    Even Private Eye knows the difference between a mere libel suit
    (money) and contempt of court (criminal record, possible prison).

    --
    not me guv

    Report
  11. Simon Brooke
    Archived post
    #11

    in message <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]

    (') said:
    Al C-F said:

    What an unutterably stupid reply.

    Whether the decision is binding or not, the OP is seeking guidance on
    avoiding a criminal record, which would affect his future career. This
    is a perfectly valid line of questioning.

    which just goes to show how ignorant you are of the English legal
    system.

    Magistrates, like judges, do not respond to letters questioning their
    decisions otherwise they would not have time to make any other
    decisions. That's why we have an appeal system.

    If the OP wants to seek guidance then he needs to look higher than a
    district judge (who admittedly is off his rocker over this one from
    what I have seen)

    [why am I bothering to reply to a twit who hides behind a pseudonym?]

    It doesn't actually matter if the judge replies. It doesn't, actually,
    matter that much whether or not he reads it. Case law is a process of
    negotiating what is socially acceptable, which is why the law changes
    over time. If the judge knows that a he's got a larger than usual
    negative postbag, he knows he's failed to administer what people
    perceive as justice. Which is the first step towards thinking about why.

    --
    [email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    ;; better than your average performing pineapple

    Report
  12. Rob Morley
    Archived post
    #12

    In article <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:
    John said:


    Why do you think the letter is pompous. Is claiming the exalted position of
    trainee solicitor pompous? Or is it pompous to be able to write clearly.

    It's pompous because he knows (or should know) that it will be of no
    effect and all he wants to do is show off in this forum


    And there was me thinking he was just winding up the Judge's office (and
    possibly encouraging others to do the same). It's a good job we have
    champions like you to ward off the threat that showoffs pose to this
    forum.

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionUK and Europe Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.