(no subject)
I've had some bizarre cases in Court recently. Yesterday, I was prosecuting a middle aged woman for shoplifting. She had no previous convictions. She went into Boots, walked around taking expensive mascaras and placed them in her bag. She was in the shop for over twenty five minutes, during which time she spoke to every member of staff then on duty. She spoke to the chemist and pointed out a distinguishing scar on her forehead. She then walked out of the shop and was caught by security, who called the police. She was caught on every CCTV camera. It transpired that she had been arrested a week earlier for stealing a sandwich from Somerfield. But she had only been cautioned, as the value was £3ish.
When she was interviewed, she stated that she had done it deliberately to get caught and had made sure that the value of the goods was high enough to merit taking her to court and getting her a conviction. She had made sure that the cameras all had a good look at her and that the staff could identify her. Apparently, she was in a 5 month abusive relationship with a man which had culminated in her calling the police and him being charged with ABH and assault. She was so scared of him that she was trying to undermine her own credibility as a witness by obtaining criminal convictions, in the hope that the Crown Prosecution Service would then drop the case against him. The CPS ignore the victim's wishes when deciding how to proceed with domestic violence cases.
Fucked up, but kind of enterprising of her, I reckon. She had subsequently changed her mind about the desirability of having a conviction for theft. We ensured that she was found not guilty: by hoping to get caught, she had no intention to deprive Boots of their stock permanently, which is an essential element of theft. She has apparently now been arrested for Arson.
Today, I was in Stoke on Trent for my case with the lorry with the wheels that fell off. The chairman of the bench of magistrates got fixated on irrelevant details relating to the tachograph. They took 50 minutes buggering around and asking pointless questions. Eventually, their clerk got pissed off and said: 'I suppose you'll want to know what colour the lorry is next! None of this is relevant!' Eventually, my clients were given absolute discharges.
When she was interviewed, she stated that she had done it deliberately to get caught and had made sure that the value of the goods was high enough to merit taking her to court and getting her a conviction. She had made sure that the cameras all had a good look at her and that the staff could identify her. Apparently, she was in a 5 month abusive relationship with a man which had culminated in her calling the police and him being charged with ABH and assault. She was so scared of him that she was trying to undermine her own credibility as a witness by obtaining criminal convictions, in the hope that the Crown Prosecution Service would then drop the case against him. The CPS ignore the victim's wishes when deciding how to proceed with domestic violence cases.
Fucked up, but kind of enterprising of her, I reckon. She had subsequently changed her mind about the desirability of having a conviction for theft. We ensured that she was found not guilty: by hoping to get caught, she had no intention to deprive Boots of their stock permanently, which is an essential element of theft. She has apparently now been arrested for Arson.
Today, I was in Stoke on Trent for my case with the lorry with the wheels that fell off. The chairman of the bench of magistrates got fixated on irrelevant details relating to the tachograph. They took 50 minutes buggering around and asking pointless questions. Eventually, their clerk got pissed off and said: 'I suppose you'll want to know what colour the lorry is next! None of this is relevant!' Eventually, my clients were given absolute discharges.