« Rubbing my woody beats plastic pleasure | Main | Stealing Justice »

Your right to remain silent isn't a right

Drivers caught on camera cannot refuse to say who was at the wheel - Times Online

The owners of cars caught by speed cameras can be prosecuted if they fail to tell police who was driving at the time, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has ruled.

Judges in Strasbourg heard the cases of the two men last September and gave their verdict today.

Mr Francis said after the verdict: “The fight for freedom goes on. We can’t allow the tyrants, who are taking away our rights, to succeed. They have to be stopped.”

The two motorists lost their case because the human rights judges threw out their claim that the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself are “absolute rights”.

The judges also disagreed that human rights were breached by direct compulsion requiring an accused person to make incriminatory statements against his or her will.

Comments

Right to silence? That was then and this is now - Be afraid. Be very afraid.

So maybe the pair should now sue the government under the Trade Descriptions Act. The police and Criminal Evidence Act lays down the following modern interpretation of the ‘right to silence’ also known as the "caution":

"You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention now something you later rely on in court, Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

This is obviously now complete rubbish. It should read something more like:

”You do not have the right to silence and failing to disclose anything we want to know could result in your receiving a harsher sentence - if we can manage to find a jail cell for you.”

Post a comment