You have chopped who you are responding to.
I am not aware that anyone in this discussion would strongly object to your
"It is in the wide interests both of public safety and of the prevention of
crime and disorder, that absconders are caught and returned to their place
of incarceration, even if the individuals are not an imminent public
I would imagine that a criminology or probation discussion group might be
better suited to discussing these aspects which seem to be outside the remit
of this group.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nigel Roberts" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Disclosure
>> I agreed with you up to here but, sorry, you've selectively quoted this
>> last bit. Breach of Art.8 has to be "necessary in the interests of ...
>> public safety" (I'm discounting any possible effect of the escape on
>> national security and economic well-being). If they aren't a threat to
>> the safety of the public (and remember that a husband who helped his
>> terminally ill wife to die was convicted of murder not so long ago) then
>> there are no grounds at all for breaching their Art.8 rights.
> Actually, I think it's you who is selectively quoting. ;-)
> My point is this.
> > Clearly that can be no doubt at all that the capture of an absconding
> > prisoner, I would suggest, fulfills the test of necessity
> > WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE BEEN CLASSIFIED AS A DANGER TO THE PUBLIC
> Art 8 is a qualified right. The purposive construction that has to be
> applied to the "national security, public safety or the economic
> well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for
> the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights
> and freedoms of others" MUST include the recapturing of offenders who have
> broken the law by absconding without having completed their sentence.
> It is in the wide interests both of public safety and of the prevention of
> crime and disorder, that absconders are caught and returned to their place
> of incarceration, even if the individuals are not an imminent public
> I doubt that such a case would ever reach Strasbourg but I would put money
> on my interpretation being the true one.
> PS: (off topic) you also said:
>> a husband who helped his terminally ill wife to die was convicted of
>> murder not so long ago
> I don't know this case you are referring to, but the precedent on exactly
> this subject is R (on the Application of Mrs Dianne Pretty) -v- Director
> Of Public Prosecutions & Secretary Of State For The Home Department 
> UKHL 61 and the subsequent case of Pretty -v- UK in Strasbourg (where it
> was ruled that the Art. 2 right to life did not include a right to die.)
> The questions a judge or criminal lawyer in any other case would almost
> certainly be :-
> 1. Did the husband kill the wife?
> 2. Did the husband (irrespective of his motive) intend
> to kill, (or intend to inflict GBH)?
> If both questions are answered in the affirmative, then (according to Lord
> Coke, and in line with Pretty) he IS guilty of murder, and would be
> sentenced to the mandatory sentence . . .
> UNLESS he successfully raised one of the statutory defences of Provocation
> or Diminished Responsibility (in which case he would NOT be convicted of
> murder, but would be guilty of manslaughter) or Insanity
> (in which case he would be not guilty but would be locked up anyway).
> All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
> available to the world wide web community at large at
> 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
> Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list
> [log in to unmask]
> Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your
> To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
> SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
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
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)