Police Harassment

[AtW]

I was a passenger in car in London. The driver was stopped by the police to be breathalysed. £50 was handed over and the driver let go. Corruption is just as rife in the UK as in Russia. The difference is that in the UK they are more clever at covering it up.

Bullcrap. This is not systematic in the UK. In Russia 90% of such police cases are expressly to get bribes, in 5% they will let you off if you have got some kind of important ID with you, and in 5% they will do you for stats purposes or because you pissed them off by not paying up. It's not the case here. I - Russian citizen - was stopped by Soviet police in Moscow more often in a space of a few months than by British police in 10 years - none here.

[AtW]

AtW - have you been divorced?

I agree that laws are unfair. What the heck do you want the judges to do if they got a law which basically says the wife gets 50% of your stuff? It's the issue for the politicians who writes laws - the Parliament, not the judges.

[BrilloPad]

Bullcrap. This is not systematic in the UK. In Russia 90% of such police cases are expressly to get bribes, in 5% they will let you off if you have got some kind of important ID with you, and in 5% they will do you for stats purposes or because you pissed them off by not paying up. It's not the case here. I - Russian citizen - was stopped by Soviet police in Moscow more often in a space of a few months than by British police in 10 years - none here.

Someone was telling me similar the other day - £50 sorted it.

I also know that Lord Sieff's(sp) son was done for drink driving. My mates uncle had to sort out getting him released and file destroyed. I believe it cost alot.

I bet these are the tip of the iceberg.

[BrilloPad]

I agree that laws are unfair. What the heck do you want the judges to do if they got a law which basically says the wife gets 50% of your stuff? It's the issue for the politicians who writes laws - the Parliament, not the judges.

remember there are seperate laws for split of assets and split of children.

for children the law is equality. it has not been implemented.

for assets, the law is quite old (I think it comes from 69 or 75). but it is case law that decides the outcomes. this changed significantly is 2000 with white vs white.

So, whether you talk about assets or children, you are wrong. All I want is the law implemented....

[SueEllen]

So, whether you talk about assets or children, you are wrong. All I want is the law implemented....

Unfortunately it never will be especially thanks to what the current government has done to the education system.

Most judges come from a sterotypical background where they have been brought up to believe that the child's place is with it's mother and mothers don't harm their own children either mentally including denying access to their father, or physically.

[AtW]

I also know that Lord Sieff's(sp) son was done for drink driving. My mates uncle had to sort out getting him released and file destroyed. I believe it cost alot.

Exceptions, at best - or just bullcrap.

[threaded]

Exceptions, at best - or just bullcrap.

Exception

[AtW]

Exception

And how often does this happen? This country has got long history of justice with written precedents all over - most decisions are fairly obvious anyway, trying to take bribe there is very risky as decision can be overturned.

Most of the people who complain about British Justice seem just to be bad losers - I did not win everything I wanted in court too, but I accepted that it was fair due process - if any bribe could have been taking place it would happen in small claims as there is a lot less extra oversight there and just one judge.

[Paddy]

And how often does this happen? This country has got long history of justice with written precedents all over - most decisions are fairly obvious anyway, trying to take bribe there is very risky as decision can be overturned.

Most of the people who complain about British Justice seem just to be bad losers - I did not win everything I wanted in court too, but I accepted that it was fair due process - if any bribe could have been taking place it would happen in small claims as there is a lot less extra oversight there and just one judge.

Bad loser?


bad loser?


another bad loser?

[AtW]

Bad loser?


bad loser?


another bad loser?

So, this shows that the system works in a way that innocents are given justice in the end - do you really think that if there were like zero cases of such appeals then it would mean the system is good? I actually think in Russia such appleals have zero chance - which does not mean innocents there are not convicted, quiet the opposite actually.

And finally - for the last time, you are confusing issues with "just" decisions or corrupt practices with issue of "independence" of courts.

UK courts are independent of the Govt, period.

UK courts in principle are pretty damn good when it comes to just decisions, this does not mean they are perfect.

UK courts in principle are pretty good when it comes to low level of corruption - this is because the system is pretty well oiled and odd decisions will be given chance at appeals so any seriously corrupt decision can be overturned.

Yet again, don't confuse all sort of issues with the independence of courts - Gordon Brown can't pick up the phone to call relevant judge and tell him to convict opposition figure despite lack of evidence - in Kremlin they can and do so all the time, well, they did enough so that courts know what decisions to make now.