• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

'not innocent enough to receive compensation'

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    'not innocent enough to receive compensation'

    Wow - what a concept!

    " Two judges rejected his claim that the Justice Secretary unfairly and unlawfully decided he was "not innocent enough to be compensated".

    Lord Justice Beatson and Mr Justice Irwin ruled that the Secretary of State was "entirely justified in the conclusion he reached."

    The 52-year-old had his conviction quashed on appeal and was subsequently acquitted of the television presenter's murder in a retrial but his application for damages was rejected by the Ministry of Justice.

    The landmark ruling made in May 2011 expanded the criteria to include cases in which new facts "so undermined" previous evidence that "no conviction could ever have been based on it". "

    Jill Dando: Barry George 'not innocent enough to receive compensation' - Telegraph

    WTF?

    #2
    Seems fair enough. He didn't prove his innocence but there wasn't enough compelling evidence to prove his guilt. What they are saying he was guilty, they just couldn't prove it. You could say a bit of common sense has been applied. Just because you are not found guilty doesn't mean you are wholly innocent. Maybe it did in law but it's flawed so seems a reasonable conclusion to me. The courts will see not guilty as innocent but the compensation people don't have to.

    Bet this is a debate in the legal professions that will go on for years if it hasn't been already though......
    'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

    Comment


      #3
      He was a weirdo who happened to have a bit of a fixation on her, much easier to blame him without proof than hunt for any serbian gunmen

      In short the authorities don't want to admit they got it wrong so they taint him as best they can
      Doing the needful since 1827

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
        Seems fair enough. He didn't prove his innocence but there wasn't enough compelling evidence to prove his guilt. What they are saying he was guilty, they just couldn't prove it.
        You must be joking - it's either guilty beyond reasonable doubt or not (meaning innocent).

        If he is guilty he should be in jail, if he isn't then he should be free and compensated just like anybody else wrongly convicted.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by AtW View Post
          You must be joking - it's either guilty beyond reasonable doubt or not (meaning innocent).

          If he is guilty he should be in jail, if he isn't then he should be free and compensated just like anybody else wrongly convicted.
          This is true - but he was a pest to women and I was pleased he was off the streets (even though I thought Dando was killed by Russian Mafia).

          There is way too much compensation going on - and that is the reason the judges should have given.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by AtW View Post
            You must be joking - it's either guilty beyond reasonable doubt or not (meaning innocent).

            If he is guilty he should be in jail, if he isn't then he should be free and compensated just like anybody else wrongly convicted.
            Yeah I get you and in law it has to be that way but in reality not being able to secure a conviction does not mean completely innocent either. The law just can't deal with that situation so has to default to innocent and is left to opinion and discussion as per this thread. Just because that is the law doesn't mean I have to believe he is completely innocent of any wrong doing.... It's a moral minefield so not gonna get in to it. Far too much we don't know to really make a difference.
            'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

            Comment


              #7
              I know for criminal injuries compensation (which I believe they're now reducing anyway) your compensation was reduced if you had a criminal record - even if unrelated to the injury you'd received. There was a sliding scale based on how bad you'd been / how long you'd been incarcerated for.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by AtW View Post
                You must be joking - it's either guilty beyond reasonable doubt or not (meaning innocent).
                In order to avoid being convicted, he has to prevent the prosecution from proving he is guilty

                In order to get compensation, he has to prove he was innocent.


                It's not a mutually exclusive binary option.


                However, it could certainly have been phrased better - "not innocent enough"

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by centurian View Post
                  In order to get compensation, he has to prove he was innocent.
                  Really?!?! WTF

                  If conviction is quashed then compensation should be automatic based on days in jail and perhaps multiplied by how harsh the jail was (max security vs open prison), any accidents ill health suffered etc - the person who is no longer guilty should not do anything other than get hand written apology from the Justice Minister + big cheque.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Do the Scots still have the the "Not Proven" or whatever it was verdict? I.e. "We know you're not innocent, but we can't prove you're guilty"?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X