Mait001 wrote in article
...
My law Degree is almost 20 years old now! I got it at a time when
jury
trial
was sacrosanct, innocence till found guilty, no dentention without
trial,
Cabinet government, no restrospective legislation .... How
old-fashioned
all of this now seems!

2004 - 19 = 1985, was there a "Modern developments" (ie since 1924)
exam ?

no-jury Diplock Courts from 1972 (and the Special Court in Dublin), Sir
Oswald Mosley interned 1940-1943 and various IRA suspects in Northern
Ireland after 1964.
Doubt has been cast on whether Cabinet government really exists from
"Parkinson's Law" at least. Retrospective legislation in civil matters
since before 1914, in criminal matters see the Nuremburg trials but
(with a special exception for this) now forbidden by the ECHR.


What retrospective legislation has been passed?

Who is not innocent till found guilty?

Your first question: all legislation that criminalises conduct
which, at the
time it was performed, was not a criminal act; e.g. Sexual Offences
Act 2003,
which criminalises certain conduct restrospectively.

Your second question: the same Act is an example: people (usually
men) can now
be subjected to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order even if acquitted
of the
offence with which they have been charged. The Order can prohibit
anything from
travelling on public transport to owning or using a telephone,
camera,
computer, television: there is no exhaustive list so the Court an
literally
order anything at all.

Another example is the various money laundering and proceeds of crime
legislation that requires someone to prove that money or property
they have in
their possession is not the proceeds of crime: unless it is so proved
it is
confiscated by the State.

Customs & Excise law allowed just that (from before 1787) prove you
paid import duty on this foreign product or it is confiscated. The
American 'civil confiscation' legislation was ruled in conformity with
their constitution because of this.

And, under the new proposals, we will all be deemed "non persons"
until we can
prove, by production of an identity card, who we are.

National Identity Cards 1939-1950

Have a word with your Bar Council Chairman (New or old, both seem to be
"sound bite and run" folks) about the obvious need for more continuing
professional education especially wrt 20th Century history.

--
Mike D

In article 01c4e6ec$ba3f56c0$LocalHost@default,
"Michael R N Dolbear" wrote:
Mait001 wrote in article
...
My law Degree is almost 20 years old now! I got it at a time when
jury trial was sacrosanct, innocence till found guilty, no
dentention without trial, Cabinet government, no restrospective
legislation .... How old-fashioned all of this now seems!

2004 - 19 = 1985, was there a "Modern developments" (ie since 1924)
exam ?

no-jury Diplock Courts from 1972 (and the Special Court in Dublin),

Never mind that, what about the introduction of criminal offences
which were summarily triable only? That was some time in the 1980s;
before then, a defendant could insist on a jury trial for literally
anything.

Sir Oswald Mosley interned 1940-1943

One of about 2,000 UK citizens interned under Defence Regulation 18B.
There was internment under Defence Regulation 14B in World War I and
before then when Habeas Corpus was suspended. There were many more
enemy aliens interned during WWII using Royal Prerogative powers -
at least 18B was approved by the Privy Council.

and various IRA suspects in Northern Ireland after 1964.

NI Internment 1971-1975; previously existed during the Irish Civil
War.

Doubt has been cast on whether Cabinet government really exists from
"Parkinson's Law" at least. Retrospective legislation in civil matters
since before 1914, in criminal matters see the Nuremburg trials but
(with a special exception for this) now forbidden by the ECHR.

A good example of a really appalling piece of clearly retrospective
legislation is the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1968. Thousands of
people retrospectively stripped of UK citizenship and absolutely the
worst thing ever done by a Labour government.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"The guilty party was the Liberal Democrats and they were hardened offenders,
and coded racism was again in evidence in leaflets distributed in September
1993." - Nigel Copsey, "Contemporary British Fascism", page 62.

"Mait001" wrote in message
...

Has the lift on the District southbound at West Brompton gone in yet?

I didn't know that this was happening, but I did see a lost
of scaffolding when I last passed there a few weeks ago.

Hmmm. According to
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...ftla_a.html#WB

"In May 1999, London Transport stated that a lift providing step-free access
to the southbound District Line platform would be provided during 1999 (see
below)
In February 2000, London Underground stated that a new 3-year multi-station
plan included "better facilities for the disabled" at this station
In September 2001, a Transport for London source stated that work would
start by the end of 2001"

According to
http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/tubem...ss_guide_1.gif the
work hasn't been done yet.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 02:52:29 +0000, David Boothroyd
wrote:


no-jury Diplock Courts from 1972 (and the Special Court in Dublin),

Never mind that, what about the introduction of criminal offences
which were summarily triable only? That was some time in the 1980s;
before then, a defendant could insist on a jury trial for literally
anything.

You got a problem with that ?

A good example of a really appalling piece of clearly retrospective
legislation is the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1968. Thousands of
people retrospectively stripped of UK citizenship and absolutely the
worst thing ever done by a Labour government.

Agreed. A despicable disgraceful act of cowardice.

Made it more than plain that we are all subjects at the mercy of political
whim and not citizens with fundamental immutable rights.


greg



--
Yeah - straight from the top of my dome
As I rock, rock, rock, rock, rock the microphone

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004, John Rowland wrote:


"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:


I believe even in the tunnel to Bank for an underground
station to replace Tower Gateway, which was originally
going to be closed in favour of Bank, but DLR decided
operationally that it was too useful to close.

Do you have any (pointers to) more information on this?

The flat straight spot between two very steep curved sections is quite
obvious if you ride the DLR to or from Bank, especially if you sit in
the front.


Is that right after the junction with the Tower Gateway branch,
immediately south of Tower Gateway station? That's the only likely-looking
straight bit i can see on the (admittedly quite poor) maps i can find.
Although it is on the right tunnel, sadly, it's even further from
Fenchurch Street than Tower Gateway - although perhaps closer to Tower
Hill.

tom

Why does it need to be so close to Fenchurch St? Many c2c trains now
stop at either Limehouse or West Ham to provide access to Docklands more
rapidly than going into Fenchurch St and out again.

In any case, DLR are unlikely to close Tower Gateway station at its
current location; it's extremely useful. However, it is due to be
reduced to a single but lengthened platform as part of the capacity
improvement project, as the island platform would become dangerously
overcrowded.

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004, John Rowland wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:

I believe even in the tunnel to Bank for an underground station to
replace Tower Gateway, which was originally going to be closed in
favour of Bank, but DLR decided operationally that it was too useful
to close.

Do you have any (pointers to) more information on this?

The flat straight spot between two very steep curved sections is quite
obvious if you ride the DLR to or from Bank, especially if you sit in
the front.

Is that right after the junction with the Tower Gateway branch,
immediately south of Tower Gateway station? That's the only
likely-looking straight bit i can see on the (admittedly quite poor)
maps i can find. Although it is on the right tunnel, sadly, it's even
further from Fenchurch Street than Tower Gateway - although perhaps
closer to Tower Hill.

Why does it need to be so close to Fenchurch St?

A rhetorical question, i assume, but for the record, the answer is to make
interchange easier.

Many c2c trains now stop at either Limehouse or West Ham to provide
access to Docklands more rapidly than going into Fenchurch St and out
again.

Good point; i wasn't aware of that. To put a number on it, in the current
winter timetable, of the 34 trains that arrive at Fenchurch Street in the
morning peak (0730-0930), 18 call at Limehouse, 1 calls at West Ham, and 7
call at both - a total of 26, or 76%, of which all except the one West
Ham-only train have DLR interchange. That's actually pretty decent, and
means i haven't really got a leg to stand on.

Still, all things being equal (which they aren't) it would be preferable
to have better interchange, surely?

In any case, DLR are unlikely to close Tower Gateway station at its
current location; it's extremely useful.

Why?

However, it is due to be reduced to a single but lengthened platform as
part of the capacity improvement project, as the island platform would
become dangerously overcrowded.

When you say 'single', do you mean it will still be an island, or will it
become a single-face platform? I can't see the latter being great for
capacity, but if reverses aren't a limiting factor, i suppose it would
work.

tom

--
Fitter, Happier, More Productive.

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:


Tom Anderson wrote:

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004, John Rowland wrote:


"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...


On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:


I believe even in the tunnel to Bank for an underground station to
replace Tower Gateway, which was originally going to be closed in
favour of Bank, but DLR decided operationally that it was too useful
to close.

Do you have any (pointers to) more information on this?

The flat straight spot between two very steep curved sections is quite
obvious if you ride the DLR to or from Bank, especially if you sit in
the front.

Is that right after the junction with the Tower Gateway branch,
immediately south of Tower Gateway station? That's the only
likely-looking straight bit i can see on the (admittedly quite poor)
maps i can find. Although it is on the right tunnel, sadly, it's even
further from Fenchurch Street than Tower Gateway - although perhaps
closer to Tower Hill.

Why does it need to be so close to Fenchurch St?


A rhetorical question, i assume, but for the record, the answer is to make
interchange easier.

Many c2c trains now stop at either Limehouse or West Ham to provide
access to Docklands more rapidly than going into Fenchurch St and out
again.


Good point; i wasn't aware of that. To put a number on it, in the current
winter timetable, of the 34 trains that arrive at Fenchurch Street in the
morning peak (0730-0930), 18 call at Limehouse, 1 calls at West Ham, and 7
call at both - a total of 26, or 76%, of which all except the one West
Ham-only train have DLR interchange. That's actually pretty decent, and
means i haven't really got a leg to stand on.

I actually thought more called at West Ham; I guess the number increases
in the off-peak.

Still, all things being equal (which they aren't) it would be preferable
to have better interchange, surely?

Yes, of course - but given the costs of changing the existing provision
(the flat, straight section of tunnel and existing Docklands area access
from Limehouse and West Ham) it wouldn't really stand up in a
cost-benefit analysis.

In any case, DLR are unlikely to close Tower Gateway station at its
current location; it's extremely useful.

Why?

When there are operational problems at Bank (for example fire alerts,
Tube strikes, that sort of thing), trains can still get to/from the
City. That wouldn't necessarily be possible with an underground station
in the safeguarded location, as trains would have to reverse in the
sidings beyond Bank. It also provides additional reversing capacity in
the City for Beckton trains, and could be used to turn trains short if
there is some operational problem on the Isle of Dogs (although I don't
know if that ever happens!).

However, it is due to be reduced to a single but lengthened platform as
part of the capacity improvement project, as the island platform would
become dangerously overcrowded.

When you say 'single', do you mean it will still be an island, or will it
become a single-face platform? I can't see the latter being great for
capacity, but if reverses aren't a limiting factor, i suppose it would
work.

I mean a single-faced platform (sorry, I didn't make that clear). This
is only really a capacity reduction of 25%, as 2 two-car platforms will
become one three-car platform. The problem is that the island platform
cannot be lengthened to accommodate additional passengers without being
widened - and there is no room to widen the viaduct. Reversals aren't a
huge issue on the DLR thanks to the computer control; the limiting
factor is how quickly you can disembark a trainload and embark the next
trainload, and that is partly limited by platform space.

There was once a plan to extend Tower Gateway over Minories into the
university building opposite, bringing it closer to Fenchurch Street,
but I don't know what happened to that idea.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - transport projects in London

David Boothroyd wrote
[...]
Never mind that, what about the introduction of criminal offences
which were summarily triable only? That was some time in the 1980s;
before then, a defendant could insist on a jury trial for literally
anything.

Nope, summary only and/or no defendant's option offences from 1879 or
before I understand.

The general rule from 1952 was all offenses with a maximum sentence of
three months imprisonment or less (with lots of exceptions).

Think Assault or no TV license.

My reference says the Criminal Law Act 1977 reduced the number of
categories from five to three, so as with the other examples of modern
legal degeneration it's far older than you think.

--
Mike D

Tom Anderson wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 21 Dec 2004:

(Re Fenchurch Street & Tower Gateway DLR stations):

Still, all things being equal (which they aren't) it would be preferable
to have better interchange, surely?

The DLR station at Limehouse is actually designed for interchange with
C2C, and is announced as such.

In any case, DLR are unlikely to close Tower Gateway station at its
current location; it's extremely useful.

Why?

I found it useful when I was commuting to Docklands on the days I went
from Streatham, as I could get a direct train into Blackfriars, then a
short ride on the District Line, and then a direct train towards East
India or Canning Town. I didn't have to faff about changing trains at
Westferry, or walking for miles around the Monument/Bank complex.

However, it is due to be reduced to a single but lengthened platform as
part of the capacity improvement project, as the island platform would
become dangerously overcrowded.

When you say 'single', do you mean it will still be an island, or will it
become a single-face platform? I can't see the latter being great for
capacity, but if reverses aren't a limiting factor, i suppose it would
work.

The trains reverse now - they come into the platform (normally platform
2), and head out the way they came. The only problem I could see is if
a train were to break down, they would have no spare track to use.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 18 December 2004

Mrs Redboots wrote:

The DLR station at Limehouse is actually designed for interchange with
C2C, and is announced as such.

The two lines are at the same height above the ground, but the
interchange (if I remember correctly) involves going down a flight of
stairs and then climbing up another!

--
John Ray