Tony Blair to Change Law of Presumption of Innocence

[Dissipate]

Deputy Political Editor
TONY Blair last night sensationally vowed to end the tradition of being presumed innocent until found guilty.

The PM pledged to turn the nation?s criminal justice system on its head and hand police sweeping new powers.

He promised fixed penalty notices for ANY crime ? forcing suspects to prove their innocence in court.

Mr Blair admitted it was a ?watershed? moment in legal history. He said in Downing Street: ?It?s summary justice. It?s tough but in my judgment the only way to deal with it.?

Offenders would range from street yobs yelling abuse to international organised crime.

He warned the criminal justice system has lost all hope of tackling crime ? and insisted the way to restore justice for ?law-abiding citizens? was to rip up centuries of legal tradition.

Mr Blair admitted cops have all but given up pursuing villains through the courts. And he vowed to bring in whatever laws they want.

He said:

" If people want us to tackle the new types of crime today you can?t do it by the rules of the game we have at the moment.

There is international crime, very brutal violent organised crime, anti-social behaviour.

In every respect these types of crime are different from when I was growing up.

People can write articles about going through this process. But it?s too complicated and too laborious.

The police end up being hidebound by a whole series of restrictions. It?s too complicated. We have to put the duty to protect the law-abiding citizen at the centre of the system.

If you are a police officer patrolling the streets and someone throws a brick through a window or abuses an old lady on the way to the shops . . . If you have to take that person all the way through a long court process, you are not going to do it.

By the time you have filled out all the forms, done the statements, got them to court, three hearings, they have defence lawyers, all the rest of it, forget it.

You may say ?yes, we should do that if we are going to charge someone with an offence?. But if that?s what you do, you don?t get the job done.

The reason I introduced fixed penalties was I said ?we have had enough of that?. With serious crime, it takes two or three years. Heaven knows the millions they spend putting it together. We then have trials going on forever and half of them get off in the end. It?s ridiculous.

If you want to change it you can change it but not by pretending the same system can be applied with a little bit of effort, because it doesn?t work."

Bringing in the laws is certain to trigger a massive rights backlash and battle with the courts.

Yesterday new Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips warned the PM against ?browbeating? judges.

Among the steps in Mr Blair?s plan is to stop housing benefit for noisy neighbours.

He also vowed even tougher crackdowns on licensees who give under-age drinkers booze and parents who fail to keep their children in check.

# TERROR
suspects must be held without charge for up to three months, Mr Blair insisted last night.

Text

It is clear to me that Britain is quickly devolving into a country with total state power. The London bombings have set off a swift government offensive on basic liberties.

 

[daveshel]

That is preposterous. Next he will wipe his ass with the Magna Carta. That makes the Patriot Act look like a good idea.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
It is clear to me that Britain is quickly devolving into a country with total state power. The London bombings have set off a swift government offensive on basic liberties.

Scary. I hope Cheney and Rove aren't moving us in the same direction.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: Dissipate
It is clear to me that Britain is quickly devolving into a country with total state power. The London bombings have set off a swift government offensive on basic liberties.

Scary. I hope Cheney and Rove aren't moving us in the same direction.

It is already Guilty until proven innocent here, Britain is just catching up to us now.

 

[Czar]

its ok its ok.. its still just the sun reporting this, blair might still not be that nuts to turn modern civilization around back they way we progressed from

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Czar
its ok its ok.. its still just the sun reporting this, blair might still not be that nuts to turn modern civilization around back they way we progressed from

Normally, I would agree but a "quote is a quote."

?It?s summary justice. It?s tough but in my judgment the only way to deal with it."

Here Blair is introducing the notion that merely being "accused" of a crime . . . any crime in his list makes you guilty.

If you are a police officer patrolling the streets and someone throws a brick through a window or abuses an old lady on the way to the shops . . . If you have to take that person all the way through a long court process, you are not going to do it.

Borrowed straight from the hyperbole playbook. The cop arrests, books, documents the crime, and then testifies (if there's a trial). Last time I checked, those are part of the job responsibilites.

By the time you have filled out all the forms, done the statements, got them to court, three hearings, they have defence lawyers, all the rest of it, forget it.

Again, I guess it's too much to ask people to do their damn job. Most defence lawyers would say to their "damn guilty" client, "take what they offer b/c your dumb arse got caught in the act!" The only people that get off would be the wealthy, but we've always tolerated that kind of miscarriage of justice.

The reason I introduced fixed penalties was I said ?we have had enough of that?. With serious crime, it takes two or three years. Heaven knows the millions they spend putting it together. We then have trials going on forever and half of them get off in the end. It?s ridiculous.

I don't know the UK legal system . . . other than the loser pays aspect. Regardless, it's almost a certainty that Blair is either exaggerating or flat out lying. If the government spends years and millions of dollars on a case, the fact that 50% :roll: get off then maybe . . . 1) they were innocent or 2) prosecutors sux.

 

[JacobJ]

Originally posted by: EatSpam
Scary. I hope Cheney and Rove aren't moving us in the same direction.

Haven't there been american citizens already secretly locked up without access to council or anyone really?

 

[2cpuminimum]

"All suspects are Guilty! Otherwise, they wouldn't be suspect, would they?"-Troops

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: JacobJ

Originally posted by: EatSpam
Scary. I hope Cheney and Rove aren't moving us in the same direction.

Haven't there been american citizens already secretly locked up without access to council or anyone really?

True, but its not quite as broad scale as Britain, yet.

 

[imported_Condor]

If there was a presumption of innocence, there would be no requirement for bail!

 

[jackschmittusa]

Condor

Presumption of innocence has nothing to do with bail. It is simply to insure your presence when the state attempts to prove its case. Sometimes, even the innocent might decline to attend the proceedings.

 

[miketheidiot]

i hope this is a joke

 

[imported_alp]

it's really bad. we just don't (well, tony blair doesn't, but nobody in this country) seems to care about freedom, not even paying lip service to it. every time something like this happens, blair just rants about 'airy-fairy libertarians' and passes the law anyway, with public support. the only time he's popular now is when he's taking people's rights. now i just think most people don't want to be free (or want anyone else to be...). it really depresses me, i can't even blame the government...

 

[CrackRabbit]

The British justice system is about to turn into the witch trial from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

 

[Red Dawn]

If they tried that here the people would rise up and take downn the Government with force if need be. I hope the Brits are as ballsy as us.

 

[firewall]

Does this apply to political scandals and rumours? Guilty until proven innocent? Hah!!! This is a mockery of fair trials and justice for all.

 

[imported_alp]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If they tried that here the people would rise up and take downn the Government with force if need be. I hope the Brits are as ballsy as us.

nope, something like 70% support these laws

 

[firewall]

Originally posted by: alp

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If they tried that here the people would rise up and take downn the Government with force if need be. I hope the Brits are as ballsy as us.

nope, something like 70% support these laws

People are sheep.... They can be made to go in any direction by careful propaganda and media campaigns.....

 

[Atheus]

It's ok, the Sun doesn't like it so it won't happen. Rupert Murdoch rules the world.

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If they tried that here the people would rise up and take downn the Government with force if need be. I hope the Brits are as ballsy as us.

In times of peace, I would 100% agree with you. But given a bad enough terrorist attack, war, etc. I'm not so sure people would be very opposed to taking away the idea of innocent until proven guitly.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
i hope this is a joke

Me too.

 

[MadRat]

I thought the SUN was a tabloid.

 

[Vanquisherfx]

I thought america's freedom was being whipped away.
If Tony Blair gets his ways. hmm. that would mean everytime an officer shoots you, you'll have to cripple yourself back up and prove your innocence.

 

[aidanjm]

outrageous. utterly unacceptable.