Donate SIGN UP

Well At Least Something Useful Has Come Out Of Yewtree

Avatar Image
youngmafbog | 14:23 Thu 18th Dec 2014 | News
19 Answers
http://news.sky.com/story/1394048/bail-limit-announced-after-celebrity-delays

And not before time too. Leaving people languishing on bail for months on end is ridiculous. 28 day is more than enough.
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
28 days is not enough in every case to gather enough evidence to charge a person for a crime, in my opinion.
I agree with hc...if it takes longer than 28 days, and it normally does for offences going back 20,30,40 years, than so be it.

Hardly any of the recent paedophiles found guilty, could have been successfully prosecuted if the 28 day had been in place. Now that the police have finally seen that they must act thoroughly, lets not tie one hand behind their backs for them.
Whereas on another post they had both hands tied behind their back and were not allowed to act thoroughly.
Question Author
It does not stop the investigation Mickey.

Woudl you be happy being on bail for a year for something you didnt do?
There is no evidence of that Retro....the Police made mistakes...get over it !
One of the points of bail is conditions can be laid down where appropriate. For example, a person could be stopped from leaving the country.
If a suspect has to be de-arrested then there would be nothing to stop him (or her) from fleeing the country.

Another condition can be to prevent the suspect contacting the alleged victim and witnesses.

Curfews, specific place of residence, injunctions can all be conditions of bail designed to protect the alleged victim and ensure the suspect remains available for further questioning.

To stop all that after only 28 days is a nonsense.
Question Author
HC, it is proposed that 28 days is standard. If the Policve want more then they will be able to apply to a Magistrate for more.

Stopping poeple from travelling for a year, just because you might find something?

Get a grip, this is the UK not China.
So you'd be happy for criminals to escape justice by fleeing overseas?

I agree that it must be a stressful nightmare to be on bail for any amount of time but it is necessary on occasion.

The voice of common sense hc...not always popular on AB !
-- answer removed --
Question Author
The problem is Mickey; you think you are right and everyone else is wrong.

Common sense is surely to set a reasonable time, with a route for extensions if required (and sufficient reason can be shown to a third party).

Remember, this is is across the spectrum of 'crime' not just your pet ones.
As I said hc...common sense really isn't popular on here !
Question Author
As I said, some of us on here are unwilling to listen to others' views and embark on a campaign of smear.
One of my neighbours has been bailed for coming up to FOUR years
[ charged ]
one mistrial which I cant remember if it was 12 or 24 mo ago
and the next one listed for April 15.

.

There should be a statute of limitations - amid popular howls, a 19 y o SS man has just been acquitted over Oradour sur Glane - oh he is 89 now - on the grounds that no one can convincingly show he was there or that if he was, he fired a gun. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oradour-sur-Glane
Just refuse to be re-bailed.
How would that work then Orderlimit ! What would be the Police reaction if somebody would not "agree" to be bailed ? Its isn't something that us mere mortals had any say in.
-- answer removed --
Hey mikey, in simple terms, if it has been decided you are to be bailed and it's in accordance with all the rules then you are bailed (the notice just basically tells you that you have been told). However, a person should always ask for the reason why police are extending bail and challenge the custody officers decision. I have heard a few stories where this has worked and people temporarily released on the grounds of insufficient evidence at that stage to charge having been bailed already several times (the police can re-arrest the same person again for the same case if any Fresh evidence comes to light).


1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Well At Least Something Useful Has Come Out Of Yewtree

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.