Jump to content

innocent until proven guilty


will_gleave
 Share

Recommended Posts

Can anyone answer this for me........

 

Someone i know in our little fraternity of shooting in the uk has been charged with a crime and surrendered his licence on advice from his firearms officer many months ago as his court date is not until next year, now today he has been served with a revocation of his licence.

 

My understanding of uk law is that he's is innocent until proven guilty so why would this happen, all seems very unfair as now when he is found not guilty he will have to reapply and will have a mark against his name as he's had a licence revoked.

 

Does this ring true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much would depend on what he is charged with , for instance if he had lost his temper a knocked his wife about then chances are they would not deem it safe to allow him to have guns in the house , they would not leave them with him on the off chance he was found not guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have concern then your best bet is to contact the BASC legal team for advice, sutch things should not be aired in public as it only gives shooting a bad name.

 

I think you are jumping the gun, sorry for Pun:

This is a police matter for whatever reason and should be highlighted in Full, Before even considering such a action..

As of this minute BASC has no jurisdiction to intervene and in my opinion, Very Unwise to comment that this action should be taken..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are jumping the gun, sorry for Pun:

This is a police matter for whatever reason and should be highlighted in Full, Before even considering such a action..

As of this minute BASC has no jurisdiction to intervene and in my opinion, Very Unwise to comment that this action should be taken..

I think you just jumped the gun I think you will find I used the word ADVISE and you used the word action it does help one to read the post. Edited by E.w.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much would depend on what he is charged with , for instance if he had lost his temper a knocked his wife about then chances are they would not deem it safe to allow him to have guns in the house , they would not leave them with him on the off chance he was found not guilty.

As above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a voluntary surrender may be seen in a better light when the dust settles-rather than the police resorting to seizing a certificate holders guns.

 

public safety will always be paramount regardless if a certificate holder regards himself as innocent.

 

f.

I'm not sure how that works, despite surrendering his ticket he has still been told it has been revoked, but months later. Why revoke it if it's been surrendered?

I agree with your second line, but if I regarded myself as innocent I wouldn't have surrendered my tickets. If and when this case goes to court why would anyone have any reason to ask if he surrendered his tickets, unless the fact he owned firearms is relevant to the case of course, and if it is relevant the first question I would ask is 'why did you surrender your ticket?'

We don't know what the defendant is charged with nor how he intends to plea; he may regard himself as guilty, and willingly surrendering his tickets is either a sly move by his FEO to persuade him a court would likely to be more lenient on him for doing so, or his FEO was instructed to persuade him thus despite them ( the police) having little evidence to prove his guilt.

There is very little to go on, but regardless of this, like I said if I regarded myself as innocent, I wouldn't have surrendered my tickets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he surrendered them,then the crime he committed must of made him realise that they would come for the licence and guns sooner or later.So it must of been violence related & if it is,then BASC or any other organisation would and should not entertain him.

And the title 'innocent till proving guilty' I think he has already admitted he's guilty by his voluntary surrender.

Edited by Davyo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say the exact crime but it is based on hearsay and a non violent crime, its 50/50 his version of events and theirs. He was originally told a week prior to being charged that he could voluntarily surrender his licence and firearms or face having his licence revoked and his firearms confiscated. it is only now he has been contacted being told that they have to serve him revocation papers and that he can appeal against this as its been on going for over 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he's been asked to either voluntarily surrender or face an ultimate revoked for his licence, then The police must think he poses a threat to either the general public or who he's had bother with.

Plus to be CHARGED they must have substantial evidence

Edited by Davyo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very rare to run a trial based on hearsay.You ask if it rings true - from what you are posting - no.

As I'm sure you know the police charge you but it's the cps that decide if there's a case to answer and lots never get to court, especially the 50/50 ones as by the time you read the second statement you can see how people flower up the story, my sons a policeman and this is his main gripe people and the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am surprised that you have access to the information that the case was rejected three times.

 

However, based on what you say, it has been submitted for prosecution four times and is now proceeding. CPS must be satisfied that there is a case to answer, with a probability of being proved.

 

Not sure what you are implying. Your friend surrendered his licence, it has now been revoked and he is due in court next year. Just what is unfair about all this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very rare to run a trial based on hearsay.

 

You ask if it rings true - from what you are posting - no.

Sexual Offences are almost always one persons word against another, the CPS will run a case with 50/50 info due to the nature, I suspect this is the case here.

 

The police have acted correctly in this case, if he if found not guilty he should be ok. I hardly think most people would admit guilt to their friends so its i the hands of the court.

Edited by Delboysparky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...