Cambridge Court case hoax phone call update

enfield_freddy

BenefitMaster wrote: »

I'm currently awaiting information from a police station in Manchester as to what this person has been charged with.

Clearly until we know what's happening, it makes sense to keep the thread open.

so , someone HAS been arrested in regard to a prank phone call


are you saying that you are just awaiting conformation of the charges?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

BenefitMaster wrote: »

I'm currently awaiting information from a police station in Manchester as to what this person has been charged with.

Clearly until we know what's happening, it makes sense to keep the thread open.

The must be multiple police stations in Manchester?

da_rule

BenefitMaster, I do not believe the case you referred to makes the point you think it is making. The case is referring to two separate matters, one of which was someone charged with a common law offence of public nuisance over the statutory offence, the reason being that the common law offence did not have such a restrictive time limit to bring a prosecution.

Paragraph 52 of the judgment deals specifically with the issue of common law v statute law.

[52] When Parliament enacted the statutory offences, it did not expressly abolish the corresponding aspect of the common law offence of public nuisance. Therefore, if – contrary to my view – Mr Rimmington's conduct in writing the letters had amounted to a public nuisance, it would presumably have continued to do so even after the statutory offences were introduced. So a charge could not have been regarded as bad simply because it was framed in terms of the common law rather than in terms of the statute. To put the matter more generally, where Parliament has not abolished the relevant area of the common law when it enacts a statutory offence, it cannot be said that the Crown can never properly frame a common law charge to cover conduct which is covered by the statutory offence. Where nothing would have prevented the Crown from charging the defendant under the statute and where the sentence imposed would also have been competent in proceedings under the statute, the defendant is not prejudiced by being prosecuted at common law and can have no legitimate complaint.

So, to sum up, a statute does not automatically stop common law rules, nor does it overrule any statutory matters, unless the statute specifically withdraws common law provisions on the matter, which the Contempt of Court Act does not do.

Lazos

kirkbyinfurnesslad wrote: »

The must be multiple police stations in Manchester?

GMP branches out to Bolton, Wigan, etc. I know the OP said 'Manchester area' but that could easily mean Greater Manchester area.

So Yes, loads of them!!

(Chorley falls into Lancashire Constabulary not GMP)

BenefitMaster

da_rule wrote: »

BenefitMaster, I do not believe the case you referred to makes the point you think it is making.

The I suggest you re-read Khan and Khan, and ask your Criminal Lecturer whether s/he agrees with the proposition that common law was frozen with the enactment of the Human Rights Act, as taught at all Law Schools offering QLD's. Sub Judice no longer has any relevance to the man on the Clapham Omnibus, and I would argue it never did

Happy to expand on this off thread... link me to a flame pit and I'll argue black is white till one of us gets knocked over on a Zebra Crossing :-)

4consumerrights

Why not take Benefit Master up on the offer Da_Rule - a good opportunity for you to argue case law..... suggest the flame pit on Pepipoo....

Parking-Prankster

I have had independent confirmation...but no further information.

enfield_freddy

ok thanks , I so it on your blog and followed the thread here , please keep us updated


alan

BenefitMaster

Just so anyone reading is aware, Da_Rule and I had a PM convo and peace has been... implied :-)

4consumerrights

BenefitMaster wrote: »

Just so anyone reading is aware, Da_Rule and I had a PM convo and peace has been... implied :-)

Glad to hear that.....
so no flame pit thrashing required:cool:

Any other news though BM updating as to the alleged arrest regarding the original post here?