In a court victory that could benefit thousands of motorists the footballer
Posted in General on 09. Oct, 2010
In a court victory that could benefit thousands of motorists, the footballer Dwight Yorke succeeded yesterday in overturning a speeding fine. But the conviction was quashed in the High Court because he did not “personally” fill in an official form to show that he was the driver.Mr Justice Owen said magistrates had established a prima facie case against Yorke on an “erroneous basis”.He conceded that the ruling could have a wide application “given the prevalence of the use of laser and photographic technology to check the speed of motor vehicles”. The question may finally have to be resolved in the House of Lords.Yorke, then living in Alderley Edge, Cheshire, was alleged to have partially filled in the form and returned it to the central ticket office in Manchester in July 2001, although it did not contain his signature.The law requires the owner or keeper of a vehicle to give information on the form identifying the driver when a vehicle is allegedly caught speeding.The judge said there appeared to be “widespread knowledge” that was spreading “like a virus” that an unsigned form was inadmissible as evidence and this might be a loophole making it possible to escape a speeding conviction.. Parents from three families wrongly accused of abusing their children were yesterday refused the right to sue the doctors who made the allegations. They allowed an appeal by a child in the case who was taken into care aged nine after a mistaken diagnosis of sex abuse against her father.The abuse allegation began when the girl, who suffered a rare skin condition, was injured while riding a bicycle. Harvey Marcovitch, consultant paediatrician and spokesman for the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, said: “If a doctor falls below acceptable standards, patients are entitled to seek recompense – that is entirely reasonable.”What paediatricians are relieved about is that the judgment does not extend the legal duty of care to the parents. That might have inhibited [the doctors' investigations] and potentially protected abusers.”Penny Mellor, a campaigner on behalf of parents who claim they have been wrongly accused of abuse, said: “Doctors and social workers have been able to behave with impunity for years.
If they suspected abuse they could rip children away and that was outrageous.”Jennifer Barnard, director of children’s services at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, said: “Although we realise it is very distressing for parents and carers involved in these cases, childcare professionals must be allowed to carry out investigations without fear of reprisals or of being sued.”. Two men who died while trying to overturn a murder conviction 33 years ago were cleared yesterday by the Court of Appeal in one of the country’s most controversial miscarriages of justice. They were convicted at the Old Bailey on 19 March 1970 of what became known as the “Luton post office murder”.They were released in 1980 but despite five hearings at the Court of Appeal the convictions were never quashed. Mr Cooper died in July 1995, aged 51, and Mr McMahon in July 1999, aged 55. They both died protesting their innocence.Lord Justice Kennedy, sitting with Mr Justice Cresswell and Mr Justice Bennett in London, overturned the convictions yesterday and said there were “now a number of matters which can be described as causes for genuine concern when evaluating the safety of these convictions”.The case began on 10 September 1969 when a four-man gang drove to Luton from London, planning to rob a post office by forcing a postal worker to hand over his keys as he left work at 6pm. But when the gang met resistance from Stevenshe was shot dead.The robbers fled in a van driven by Alfred Matthews, who already had a conviction for robbing post offices He later surrendered himself and was charged with murder.
But Kenneth Drury then a police Commander, offered to drop charges against Matthews if he testified against three East End petty crooks. Matthews walked free after he picked out David Cooper, Michael McMahon and a third man, Patrick Murphy, in an identity parade, saying they had been with him on the raid.Drury was later convicted of five counts of corruption in connection with another case and was jailed in 1977 for eight years.The murder case went to trial in 1970 and the presiding judge, Mr Justice Cusack, recommended that each of the convicts should serve a minimum of 20 years of a life sentence. But public unease over the conviction persisted and in June 1980 Ludovic Kennedy published his book on the case, Wicked Beyond Belief. Within a month, the former home secretary William Whitelaw released the men from prison.In March 2001, the Criminal Cases Review Commission decided to refer the case back for the sixth appeal.Ben Emmerson QC, representing the families of the two men, said investigations had uncovered a “considerable volume” of fresh evidence.Mr Cooper’s brother, Terry Disher, 59, said after yesterday’s ruling: “I am pleased … but I am still bitter about the way they have been treated by the judiciary and the way a corrupt police officer conducted the case.”. A high-flying City worker has won £1m in compensation from his former employer, the international broking firm Cantor Fitzgerald. He had also threatened to “rip his head off”, the High Court in London was told.Cantor, which won the sympathy of the world when 658 of its employees at the World Trade Centre were killed in the terror attacks of 11 September 2001, had argued in court that shouting and swearing were commonplace in the broking world because of its highly pressured nature.However, Mr Justice Newman said in his judgment: “I reject as fallacious that where very substantial sums of money are paid by an employer, it acquires the right to treat employees according to a different standard of conduct.”The judge was not swayed by Mr Amaitis’s repeated claim that he had done little more than speak in a “direct” way to his former senior managing director.”In my judgment, Mr Amaitis is a dictatorial manager.
The company must also pay his legal fees of £250,000.Cantor said it would petition the Court of Appeal for a chance to overturn the judgment. Cantor has been damaged further by repeated allegations that it is commonplace in the broking world for individuals to relax by going to lap-dancing clubs and snorting cocaine. Mr Horkulak had a nervous breakdown after spending three years at Cantor and admitted during the trial that he was addicted to cocaine in 1998 and also had a drinking problem. He sought treatment at The Priory clinic.Yesterday, he flew into the UK from a family holiday in the Algarve, Portugal, to hear the judgment. This case shows that anybody can complain if they feel subjected to a hostile working environment.”. As yet another high-profile allegation of a sexual offence collapses before it gets to trial, the pressure to guarantee anonymity to men and women accused of such crimes grows.