Law Weblog

No prosecution for assisting suicide

The Crown Prosecution Service has effectively ruled out the prosecution of relatives who assist the terminally ill to commit suicide after announcing it would take no action against the family of rugby player Daniel James, despite having sufficient evidence to do so.

Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC stated he would not prosecute the parents and a family friend of the 23-year-old, who was paralysed in a training ground accident, for assisting his death.  Starmer said:

“I have concluded that a prosecution is not needed in the public interest,”

Publishing the reasons for his decision is unprecedented. The case was described by prosecutors yesterday as a landmark and is the first to rule out prosecution on the grounds of public interest alone.

We don’t thing this will be the last word on this topic …

Tax dodgers – barristers

Revenue and Customs has disclosed that 57 barristers have been caught evading tax. Thirty-six reached a private settlement with Revenue and Customs and agreed to return £605,000 between them in unpaid tax and fines. Some 21 are still being investigated.

Full story in The Guardian, here

DNA first – appeal by Pitchfork

Colin Pitchfork, the first person in the world to be convicted of murder on the basis of DNA evidence was given permission to challenge his sentence (on 4th December 2008).

In 1988, Pitchfork, was jailed for the murders of two schoolgirls, he is currently serving a minimum term of 30 years of a life sentence.

He is now 48 and claims the 30 years is manifestly excessive and wants it reduced.  If it is reduced he would be eligible to apply for release on parole.

His crimes were described in court as “heinous”, he raped and strangled the two girls aged 15.

DNA was found on the victims and a mass screening of local men took place; Pitchfork avoided detection for a while by paying another man to pretend to be him and give a sample.  The deception was uncovered when the other man was heard bragging about what he had done.

Will all students please note …"Bloody" is offensive

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ordered The Sun newspaper not to use the word ‘bloody’ on posters in future. said it was socially irresponsible to use the word in an advert that appeared in a public place.

The offensive advert appeared on the side of a lorry.

“Where the bloody hell were you?”

There was a background of the Union Jack flag. It showed Great Britain’s Olympic gold medal tally of 19 compared to Australia’s 14.

The paper said that the ad was a tongue-in-cheek reference to a well-known advert for the Australian Tourist Board. It said it considered the word “bloody” to be “a generally acceptable mild epithet, and not offensive.”

The ASA said:

“We acknowledged that The Sun’s ad had been prepared in a light-hearted and tongue-in-cheek manner, following the UK’s recent success at the Olympics, but nevertheless considered that the word ‘bloody’ was a swear word, albeit a milder one than some others and concluded that it was socially irresponsible to reproduce it in advertising in an untargeted medium to which children could be exposed”.

Bibs of shame – day one

Yesterday, the first convicted UK criminals forced to wear controversial bright orange bibs whilst performing community payback took to the streets.

The bibs of shame were designed as public reminders that offenders cleaning graffiti or other community work are being punished.

Opponents argue that they are medieval and can be likened to the stocks and a form of shaming.

Harry Fletcher, assistant general secretary of the probation officers’ union Napa, said:

"There have already been a number of attacks. The use of high-visibility vests seems certain to increase the risk."