Hence that the evidence is to be passed to the police for investigation.
That is what their job is. Their job is not "not to investigate". Please
remember that investigation happens, then a decision to prosecute, and then
a magistrate's court hearing. It is not "closer" to lynch law. It is not
lynch law at all. It is, or should be, the due process of the law.
The shopkeeper is both victim of a crime and a witness. The perpetrator has
the right to his day in court. If it were lynch law the boys with the
baseball bats would have dealt with him.
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Turner,Tim (Corporate
Resources)
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 1:45 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [data-protection] DPA to blame agai n
How does anyone know that the person in the photograph is the perpetrator?
It's not necessarily a fact, it's what the victim says. He might be lying,
it might be a photograph of someone else. That's why we have police and
prosecutors, to assess the evidence and determine what facts might be
suggested by the evidence. The police have to do their job properly, I
accept that, and they sometimes don't. But give licence to members of the
public to put their own judgement in place of the police goes closer to
lynch law than you're admitting.
[snip]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|