Type to search


We have, in these British Isles of ours, literally centuries of Law, of precedent and of legal opinion. I once walked through the lower basement of a very famous solicitor’s office in Lincoln’s Inn Fields as part of an electrical survey; and I discovered I was walking in the midst of  our very history; with names like the close female relative of a Royal Navy admiral, an admiral who was shot for cowardice; painted on a tin box, locked tight shut.

The tenet ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ has proven of exemplary use in legal terms from the ancients Greeks, onwards through Roman times, through mediaeval Courts after Magna Carta was revised, and so on down the centuries. The Crown must prove their case against the accused; and he need not speak a single word in his defence. That tenet, that basic Judicial armour, has been the very founding of our British Legal System, and it has served us well.

I was brought up to both live within, and admire, the British Legal System; because it was and is precedent driven, clearly laid down without ambiguity; and is based upon the truth that a suspect is proven guilty either by evidence laid and scrutinised by magistrate, or judge and jury; or by an admission of guilt, made freely and without duress, in front of sworn officers of the Law.

We now find that the head of the Crown Prosecution Service is planning to lay greater stress on ever-longer sentences for those convicted of ‘Hate Crime’ online, because she states that “But we should remember that there is a less visible frontline which is easily accessible to those in the UK who hold extreme views on race, religion, sexuality, gender and even disability.”

Can it be right that a person is jailed because he or she simply cannot prove a negative? The burden of proof has now been taken from the accuser, or the police and CPS, and placed firmly upon the suspect. Can it be right, in the eyes of the Law, that the victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception.

We have allowed people, probably with the best motives in the world, to seriously undermine our respect for the law, because legislation such as ‘Hate Crime’ has seriously undermined the original protections afforded by Common Law, possibly because it is easier to catch and charge someone if the police, or the CPS, do not have to prove that the suspect did write, speak or send sentences, words or indeed actions contrary to the Common Law; but instead have to rely on the minds which have been ‘offended’?

The CPS has also stated: ‘The prosecution does not… need to prove hatred as the motivating factor behind an offence.’

The CPS says any crime that involves ‘ill-will, ill-feeling, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment, or dislike’ on the basis of a ‘personal characteristic’ could be a hate crime. So unfriendliness can now be criminal.

Britons, demand your M.P.s look at this Legislation, write and demand a change; demand that this pernicious pile of legal offal be dispatched to the gutter where it belongs, and restore the rights and privileges of a Suspect who does not have to prove anything, never mind innocence, send the ‘Multiple offended’ back to their silly little mouseholes; and the Crown Prosecution Service will have to commence working for a living once again.

Further to expressing my own opinions, I find I am not alone, so please visit this petition page, and register YOUR opposition to this dark and dangerous Hate Crime Legislation.


You Might also Like