| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Lurid Crime Tales- |
| Security van makes 120 mile trip to escort prisoner 200 yards in Northampton |
| 2008-06-06 |
| A security van was sent on a 120-mile round trip to move a prisoner 200 yards to avoid breaching his human rights. Mark Bailey, 35, was taken to a Crown Court but after a brief hearing sent immediately to the magistrates' court across the road. Police said Bailey could not be walked across the street in handcuffs because it would breach his human rights - so a van was scrambled from 60 miles away for the 30 second journey. Campaigners and MPs branded the decision "a shocking waste of money" and said it was "no wonder" Britain's criminal justice system was in such a state of chaos. Bailey appeared from custody before Northampton Crown Court Tuesday morning charged with stealing cable from a railway line. A judge decided it was better dealt with by magistrates and Bailey was ordered to appear the same day. However, by this time the prison van had gone. Police refused to walk him across Victoria Road, which separates the buildings, so a van was called from Cambridge, 57 miles away, to pick him up and drop him off. He finally arrived at the magistrates' court two hours and 40 minutes after the van was called. Charged with theft and going equipped, Bailey, from Northampton, was remanded in custody. A spokeswoman for Northamptonshire police said it would "not be appropriate" to walk a prisoner down a public street. She said: "Once a person is in the courts system, they are no longer in police custody and police are not responsible for their transportation. "It would not be appropriate for prisoners to walk in a public area while in custody for many reasons, including public safety issues, as well as the safety and human rights of the prisoner. "Until someone has been convicted of an offence they are innocent in the eyes of the law and it would therefore be inappropriate for them to be escorted across a busy main road in handcuffs." Brian Binley, Conservative MP for Northampton South, said: "I've never heard such nonsense. Why we should have to suffer such ludicrous incompetence, and pay for it, is beyond me. "In my view, Bailey should have been escorted across the road but if they were worried about him absconding, they could have put him in a squad car - the police station is just around the corner." Matthew Elliott, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, added: "This is absurd and a total waste of money. No wonder our prisons are in such a state of chaos, if they can't even manage to escort a prisoner 200 yards between buildings. "If anyone had shown a bit of initiative this could have been sorted out in five minutes, but instead taxpayers had to foot the bill for this wasteful trek." A barrister at the court - who wishes to remain anonymous - said: "The transport of prisoners to court is ludicrous and a joke." A spokesman for Global Solutions Limited, responsible for the movement and security of prisoners, said: "It was an unplanned movement and the van had gone to do other things. It is not a taxi service and has a range of duties to make best use of taxpayers' money. It is more efficient doing it this way than having a load of vehicles sitting around outside court just in case." He said he did not know whether the van came from Cambridge. Well, the govt took care of this guy. Unfortunately, the citizens and crime victims get no protection. What about their human rights? And while we are full of indignation, what about the carbon dioxide spewing out of the van for 120 miles? Global warming criminals. Everyone should have gone into the van to jail. It is a mad hatter's tea party. |
| Posted by:Alaska Paul |
| #1 Must be something in the water over there. A British company bought a local factory and now, in order for the test lab in the local factory to obtain a run sample for testing they must follow the following procedure: 1. The local test lab must dispatch a request for a sample to an office 600 miles away. 2. Upon approval the office 600 miles away orders that a sample from the local production line be set aside for testing. 3. Said sample is then boxed and sent to the shipping department of the local factory. 4. Said sample is dispatched from the shipping department of the local factory via UPS. 5. UPS takes said sample approximately 100 miles north from local factory to a sorting facility where it is duly sorted and later returned to a shipping facility 60 miles south of the local factory. 6. UPS delivers the sample to the shipping department of the local factory where it is then delivered to the local test department. Keep in mind that the local shipping department, test facility, and production lines are all under the same roof and that none is more than 300 yards from the other two. And Europeans wonder why they're not competitive. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2008-06-06 18:06 |