tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post2765387657481986818..comments2024-03-28T09:08:50.733+00:00Comments on Law and Lawyers: Inquest - London Bombs of 7th July 2005ObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-36050344111988728172011-05-17T11:45:35.774+01:002011-05-17T11:45:35.774+01:00Brif Ustus Cymru - currently Lord Judge.
Since ...Brif Ustus Cymru - currently Lord Judge. <br /><br />Since the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 - the LCJ is LCJ of England and Wales.<br /><br />You raise a good question - I don't have an answer. It is clear that the Welsh Assembly is producing a lot of Welsh Measures with the result that the law in Wales is diverging from that of England. There seems little doubt that more power will be devolved. Whether that extends to permitting them to develop a distinct criminal law is a further issue.<br /><br />i was interested to see what <a href="http://www.aber.ac.uk/cy/news/archive/2010/07/title-88435-cy.html" rel="nofollow">Abersytwyth University</a> had to say and also this <a href="http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/13170.htm" rel="nofollow">protocol</a> relating to the Welsh language being used in courts in Wales.ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-56215745690972274602011-05-16T13:42:21.121+01:002011-05-16T13:42:21.121+01:00Thanks for the reference, indeed of interest. Heat...Thanks for the reference, indeed of interest. Heather Hallett was one of those people whom you notice, at an early stage of their career ( in HCH's, when she became a judge), has *something* suggesting further advancement, possibly to the top of their profession (as Joshua Roszenberg *undoubtedly* reads "Law And Lawyers", he can note Law bloggers and their commenting readers' anticipation of who the next/next-but-one Chief Justice will be).<br /><br />Not that I would claim predictive powers: some years ago Owld West's Almanack thought Brenda Hale could be Mistress Of The Rolls and Patricia Scotland, Lady Chancellor...and didn't consider Igor Judge a candidate for the "Collar Of Esses". <br /><br />Meanwhile, following my prediction about legal devolution: who will be Wales's first "Brif Ustus Cymru"?Westenglandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01044799705613669714noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-24847200252593938232011-05-15T12:01:39.133+01:002011-05-15T12:01:39.133+01:0015th May - Addendum - some interesting items by th...15th May - Addendum - some interesting items by the Royal United Services InstituteObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-47819312079642728662011-05-15T11:02:37.730+01:002011-05-15T11:02:37.730+01:00@ Westengland - you may be interested to read what...@ Westengland - you may be interested to read what Joshua Rozenberg had to say in the Law Society Gazette 12th May:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/opinion/joshua-rozenberg/lady-justice-hallett-could-become-first-woman-lord-chief-justice" rel="nofollow">here</a>ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-31262548732149347212011-05-11T22:19:21.736+01:002011-05-11T22:19:21.736+01:00Of interest is The Telegraph article on the inques...Of interest is <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/allison-pearson/8498657/77-bombings-Was-justice-done-for-them.html" rel="nofollow">The Telegraph article</a> on the inquest.ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-70518408899820997852011-05-11T11:17:57.404+01:002011-05-11T11:17:57.404+01:00In fact a very skewed process has been invoked for...In fact a very skewed process has been invoked for the 4 accused.<br /><br />An Inquest which had no representation for the 4 to challenge the police evidence or ask for witnesses to be called and evidence adduced.<br /><br />An Inquest with no jury.<br /><br />A criminal trial in which the evidence was not examined as the 3 accused had no knowledge of the attacks and therefore had no basis on which to challenge any of the evidence.<br /><br />In fact, one of the prosecution's opening statements was shown <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/02/simply-wrong.html" rel="nofollow">to be false</a> due to the intervention of J7.<br /><br />Overall, there has been no due process in establishing the guilt of the 4 accused and without a truly independent public inquiry held outside of the IA05 there never will be.<br /><br />Which leaves only <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">J7 examining the evidence</a> as investigative journalism is now a thing of the seemingly distant past and justice has not been seen to be done.Bridgethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-32026422617362680032011-05-11T10:50:28.846+01:002011-05-11T10:50:28.846+01:00@ Bridget (reply 2) - If I remember this correctly...@ Bridget (reply 2) - If I remember this correctly, criminal proceedings relating to conspiracy to cause explosions took place against 3 men who were acquitted (at a second trial). {They were convicted of something else}. Those criminal proceedings may have triggered Coroners Act 1988 s.16(1)(b) and, therefore, eventually entitled Hallett LJ to apply s.16(3). It would, I think, have been better had Hallett LJ set out why she considered that she was entitled to use 16(3).<br /><br />Regarding Hallett LJ's actual application of s.16(3)- It seems that the families of the 4 men had opportunity to make representations about whether the inquests should be resumed. Hallett LJ said:<br /><br />"There is one other matter to which I must now turn. I also have jurisdiction over the inquests into the deaths of Mohammed Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer,Hasib Hussain and Jermaine Lindsay and thus the responsibility of deciding whether or not I should, in my discretion, resume any or all of those inquests.<br /><br />Under section 16(3) of the Coroners Act 1988, an inquest may be resumed only if, in the opinion of the coroner, they have sufficient cause to do so. <br /><br />In my ruling in May of last year, I adjourned consideration of this issue to give time to the families of these men to advance submissions if they wished to do so. However, nothing was put before me at that time that would have justified resumption of any of their inquests and I made it clear that I would require good and proper reasons before doing so.<br /><br />On 11 March 2011 I ordered that any person wishing to make representations should do so by 18 March. In the event, none of the families have sought to argue that any of these inquests should be resumed or, indeed, submitted any representations at all. The only submissions I have received have come from an organisation calling itself the July 7th Truth Campaign. I have considered those submissions, but in the light of all the evidence I have heard during the 52 inquests, I consider they have not provided any sufficient reason to resume the inquests into the four bombers. In any event, I consider that the organisation does not fall within the legal criteria for an interested person contained in rule 20(2) of the Coroners Rules 1984. In the light of the position adopted by their families, and given that the inquests into the deaths of the 52 victims have led to the most rigorous scrutiny of the events of 7 July 2005, I can find no cause whatsoever to resume the inquests into the deaths of the<br />four men."<br /><br />Obviously, we do not know why their families chose not to make any representations though, as we do know, they had no legal aid.<br /><br />What verdict will be recorded for the 4 men? I am not sure at this stage. "Suicide" would seem appropriate - there must be sufficient evidence here to say that they intended to kill themselves - along with others. Their own deaths was an inevitable consequence of detonating the explosive substance and people can be taken to intend such consequences. [Extensive case law exists on this point of intention].<br /><br />Further questions relate to Inquiries. The Inquiries Act 2005 is an example of exceptionally unsatisfactory law-making. I am of the view that it has seriously damaged the whole concept of a truly independent inquiry. {Analysis of that Act is another story but a distinguished former Canadian Supreme Court Judge said that no "self-respecting judge" would conduct an inquiry under those conditions}. <br /><br />It was interesting that, in 2010, Teresa May said that she reserved the right to call an inquiry and thus stop the inquest by using Coroners Act 1988 s17A. However, she did not actually do so.<br /> <br />I note that there are still calls from some of the victim's families for an inquiry. I would now be very surprised if one is actually held.ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-70684538897026023842011-05-11T10:49:45.457+01:002011-05-11T10:49:45.457+01:00@ Bridget (reply 1) - Hallett LJ gave her reasons ...@ Bridget (reply 1) - Hallett LJ gave her reasons for naming them at para 8 of the R43 report and one of those reasons were that the names were already well known anyway. <br /><br />An inquest verdict may not suggest criminal or civil liability but the R43 report is not the verdict so a Coroner who decides to make such a report clearly has greater freedom. Could an intelligible R43 report have been written without reference to the names? After all, when making recommendations there is a need to set out, in sufficient detail, the factual arguments in support of that recommendation.<br /><br />The refusal to give the families legal aid was on the basis that the "published exceptional funding criteria" were not met. As far as I can see (and I may be wrong), Ministers did not amplify this and say why the criteria were not met.ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-38370672916285501472011-05-11T00:02:47.487+01:002011-05-11T00:02:47.487+01:00• Section 16(3) gives the coroner discretion to d...• Section 16(3) gives the coroner discretion to decide whether or not to resume an adjourned inquest after criminal proceedings have been completed. <br /><br />There were no criminal proceedings so on what basis can Lady Hallett refuse to resume the Inquests into the 4?Bridgethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-84976814956608014262011-05-10T23:57:03.039+01:002011-05-10T23:57:03.039+01:00Was Lady Hallett right to name the 4 accused in he...Was Lady Hallett right to name the 4 accused in her Rule 43 report given that the families of these men had been denied legal representation in these proceedings?<br /><br />The July 7th Truth Campaign submission for resumption of the Inquests into the 4 can be read <a href="http://77inquests.blogspot.com/2011/03/j7-submission-for-resumption-of.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Bridgethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04220942517267393608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-28017860156127889022011-05-06T16:56:12.722+01:002011-05-06T16:56:12.722+01:00Beverley McLachlin is Chief Justice of Canada. Si...Beverley McLachlin is Chief Justice of Canada. Sian Elias is Chief Justice of New Zealand. Maybe the time is right for England and Wales to finally get a female Lady CJ.ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-51818551953177649712011-05-06T16:50:23.783+01:002011-05-06T16:50:23.783+01:00@ Westengland - para 1 - I agree. Para 2 - very l...@ Westengland - para 1 - I agree. Para 2 - very likely - Lord Judge is coming up 70. Hallett LJ is about 62 and has been in the Court of Appeal since 2005. She has got to be a candidate as and when there is a vacancy.ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-61948300730546329242011-05-06T16:32:33.824+01:002011-05-06T16:32:33.824+01:00This verdict, with that of Tomlinson last week, is...This verdict, with that of Tomlinson last week, is a vindication of open Inquests, thorough Coroners and conscientious Juries: each "fundamental" (to use that much abused word) parts of *our* Law that some would weaken for political, economic and administrative advantage.<br /><br />Meanwhile, I note another step in this Coroner's steady path to Chief Justice.Westenglandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01044799705613669714noreply@blogger.com