|
Richard
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 66,
Visits: 449
|
+x+xAs my hearing approaches the one thing I am worried about is the press. Searching for other SHPO discharge cases I can only find one single press article for a SHPO discharge. My original case got no press coverage thankfully. Does anyone known if the press are interested in these type of hearings? I can't recall any local reports of it, even had a wee look on some local papers websites out of interest and there's nothing. Unless you're a famous person or your crime was particularly egregious then I don't think there's must interest in reporting stuff like this. Not exciting and salacious enough for the papers I'd wager. Thanks I had a look as well and can find just one article from a few years ago about a discharge being refused. There is nothing else I can see so reporting is rare. I suspect I will be okay. Just don't want to come all this way with moving on with my life just for my local paper to print something which sets it all back. Probably worrying over nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
khafka
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 385,
Visits: 20K
|
+xAs my hearing approaches the one thing I am worried about is the press. Searching for other SHPO discharge cases I can only find one single press article for a SHPO discharge. My original case got no press coverage thankfully. Does anyone known if the press are interested in these type of hearings? I can't recall any local reports of it, even had a wee look on some local papers websites out of interest and there's nothing. Unless you're a famous person or your crime was particularly egregious then I don't think there's must interest in reporting stuff like this. Not exciting and salacious enough for the papers I'd wager.
|
|
|
|
|
punter99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 859,
Visits: 6.9K
|
+x+x+xI have an internet SHPO and have applied to the court to have it discharged. I expected a hearing so that I could put across my arguments. The police disagree with my application but I feel their arguments are weak and that they have made a statement to the court which is factually correct but written in such a way to paint me in a bad light. For example they mention alerts that have occurred on my devices and have implied I am doing something wrong to cause these and therefore the SHPO and monitoring software needs to remain to monitor me. I have only been made aware of 2 of these alerts both of which were dismissed by my offender manager as not requiring any further action. They were trigged by a picture of my own children as a desktop background and an invoicing package that I use for work purposes. I am sure the other alerts must be false as well otherwise they would have taken action. Today the judge has refused the application saying a hearing is not required and as my offender manager has concerns he is refusing the application. Is it correct a judge can just dismiss without a hearing. He quoted CPR 31.5 (4) for him to be allowed to do it but I have looked at this and the next section CPR 31.5 (5) suggests he can't do this unless I have had a chance to make representations at a hearing. The whole reason I want to do this is so I can get my conviction spent and move on with my life. I know it is a battle if the police don't agree but I have changed so much since my conviction, I am no longer the same person I was back then. I am not a risk to the public and believe I can prove this. I thought this is what criteria they were looking for. Hi Hopefully you will find the attached of some use. I'm sure you will be able to format it to your style as some may of been lost in my removal of hopefully all my personal data. I'm sure you will get the approach I undertook but if questions just let me know. As my hearing approaches the one thing I am worried about is the press. Searching for other SHPO discharge cases I can only find one single press article for a SHPO discharge. My original case got no press coverage thankfully. Does anyone known if the press are interested in these type of hearings? There does not appear to be much press interest. You could always ask for it to be heard in chambers, but unless it is a straight forward situation of the SHPO being for the wrong length of time, the judge probably won't agree to that.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 66,
Visits: 449
|
+x+xI have an internet SHPO and have applied to the court to have it discharged. I expected a hearing so that I could put across my arguments. The police disagree with my application but I feel their arguments are weak and that they have made a statement to the court which is factually correct but written in such a way to paint me in a bad light. For example they mention alerts that have occurred on my devices and have implied I am doing something wrong to cause these and therefore the SHPO and monitoring software needs to remain to monitor me. I have only been made aware of 2 of these alerts both of which were dismissed by my offender manager as not requiring any further action. They were trigged by a picture of my own children as a desktop background and an invoicing package that I use for work purposes. I am sure the other alerts must be false as well otherwise they would have taken action. Today the judge has refused the application saying a hearing is not required and as my offender manager has concerns he is refusing the application. Is it correct a judge can just dismiss without a hearing. He quoted CPR 31.5 (4) for him to be allowed to do it but I have looked at this and the next section CPR 31.5 (5) suggests he can't do this unless I have had a chance to make representations at a hearing. The whole reason I want to do this is so I can get my conviction spent and move on with my life. I know it is a battle if the police don't agree but I have changed so much since my conviction, I am no longer the same person I was back then. I am not a risk to the public and believe I can prove this. I thought this is what criteria they were looking for. Hi Hopefully you will find the attached of some use. I'm sure you will be able to format it to your style as some may of been lost in my removal of hopefully all my personal data. I'm sure you will get the approach I undertook but if questions just let me know. As my hearing approaches the one thing I am worried about is the press. Searching for other SHPO discharge cases I can only find one single press article for a SHPO discharge. My original case got no press coverage thankfully. Does anyone known if the press are interested in these type of hearings?
|
|
|
|
|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 1.8K
|
+xI have an internet SHPO and have applied to the court to have it discharged. I expected a hearing so that I could put across my arguments. The police disagree with my application but I feel their arguments are weak and that they have made a statement to the court which is factually correct but written in such a way to paint me in a bad light. For example they mention alerts that have occurred on my devices and have implied I am doing something wrong to cause these and therefore the SHPO and monitoring software needs to remain to monitor me. I have only been made aware of 2 of these alerts both of which were dismissed by my offender manager as not requiring any further action. They were trigged by a picture of my own children as a desktop background and an invoicing package that I use for work purposes. I am sure the other alerts must be false as well otherwise they would have taken action. Today the judge has refused the application saying a hearing is not required and as my offender manager has concerns he is refusing the application. Is it correct a judge can just dismiss without a hearing. He quoted CPR 31.5 (4) for him to be allowed to do it but I have looked at this and the next section CPR 31.5 (5) suggests he can't do this unless I have had a chance to make representations at a hearing. The whole reason I want to do this is so I can get my conviction spent and move on with my life. I know it is a battle if the police don't agree but I have changed so much since my conviction, I am no longer the same person I was back then. I am not a risk to the public and believe I can prove this. I thought this is what criteria they were looking for. Hi Hopefully you will find the attached of some use. I'm sure you will be able to format it to your style as some may of been lost in my removal of hopefully all my personal data. I'm sure you will get the approach I undertook but if questions just let me know.
Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------
This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.
|
|
|
|
|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 1.8K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI have an internet SHPO and have applied to the court to have it discharged. I expected a hearing so that I could put across my arguments. The police disagree with my application but I feel their arguments are weak and that they have made a statement to the court which is factually correct but written in such a way to paint me in a bad light. For example they mention alerts that have occurred on my devices and have implied I am doing something wrong to cause these and therefore the SHPO and monitoring software needs to remain to monitor me. I have only been made aware of 2 of these alerts both of which were dismissed by my offender manager as not requiring any further action. They were trigged by a picture of my own children as a desktop background and an invoicing package that I use for work purposes. I am sure the other alerts must be false as well otherwise they would have taken action. Today the judge has refused the application saying a hearing is not required and as my offender manager has concerns he is refusing the application. Is it correct a judge can just dismiss without a hearing. He quoted CPR 31.5 (4) for him to be allowed to do it but I have looked at this and the next section CPR 31.5 (5) suggests he can't do this unless I have had a chance to make representations at a hearing. The whole reason I want to do this is so I can get my conviction spent and move on with my life. I know it is a battle if the police don't agree but I have changed so much since my conviction, I am no longer the same person I was back then. I am not a risk to the public and believe I can prove this. I thought this is what criteria they were looking for. Did you have a solicitor / barrister involved? Since you made the application to the courts, you should have been given every chance to produce evidence as to why the SHPO should be discharged, you can normally include a lot info and evidence with in the application. It is then down to the police to provide their evidence and reasons as to why it should not be discharged. It seems to me you were just unfortunate to be given a Judge who simply was not interested in your application. I recall when I submitted my own application I went in quite a lot of detail, quoting the Smith ruling proving the restrictions on my SHPO were disproportionate, the contact restriction infringes on my rights to family life, how the SHPO its self was preventing me from a change of circumstances (finding work and training) The first Judge I had was not interested in my application, so my barrister pushed for me to obtain more evidence on my work history. I was then appointed a new Judge who was more fair and willing to hear my application. Since the Judge has made the decision to dismiss your application, you need to look into if you can appeal it, or if you can just reapply normally. I was told by my judge that applying for discharge is a one time deal. I don't have a barrister/solicitor involved. My application gave a lot of detail as to why it should be discharged. The fact I have changed and the impact it has on my work and personal life. Most importantly stressing the reasons why I am not a risk to the public. I did look at getting a solicitor but the cost was too high. But as part of the work to give me the quote she did look at my application and said it was pretty good with strong grounds for it to be dismissed. My concerns on this is I believe the police have not given the full facts to the judge in their statement (a copy of which I have never seen prior to the judge giving his ruling). They have mentioned alerts I have had on my devices but in the context that these were bad alerts when in fact they were false alerts. They have also stated that the monitoring software is imperative to manage me when in fact the software is only installed on the laptop I use for my business and not on my personal devices. I also believe I should have been given the opportunity to have a hearing in court. I was expecting this to happen before a ruling was given I am worried about not being able to submit another application, I have asked the court about this and pointed out my concerns above. I am not aware of any rules preventing someone from applying more than once to have an SHPO discharged. The only test would be, has there been a change in circumstances since the previous application? But really this is about whether or not the judge correctly interpreted the CPR. I agree that they did not, so that should be grounds for an appeal in any case. Thanks it does look like the CPR was not interpreted correctly. His conclusion was that he could do it without a hearing because he had all the information to hand but I think he can only do this if he is to approve the discharge. In any other case a hearing should be allowed. If I do get to a hearing I may look into a solicitor to represent me. The quote I had last time was £5000 plus VAT but this seemed really steep. Does anyone know if this sounds reasonable or is it a high sky cost? Hi My sopo cost me £600 ish a couple of years back. Obviously I do not know the full in and outs yours is saying they have to do but does seem high. I believe his contact details are still the same. http://www.andrewstorchsolicitors.com/our-people/michael-phillips/ +44 7973953971 Good luck Further to this, sorry for not including it, I only used a solicitor for the first discharge of certain conditions. The second and full discharge I undertook myself. It took a long time to present the document in a manner that the Judge actually thought I had used a solicitor; at the hearing he actually thought I was the solicitor. Truth is I used the original document as a template to show how I should reference legal aspects and took all my emotions out of my points. Therefore believe that you can do it by yourself no matter the hurdles and time it takes to write the document. there is always others here to support you. Would you be prepared to share parts of your document? Obviously redact anything personal. Thanks Paul, sorry for the delay but will get something posted.
Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------
This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.
|
|
|
|
|
punter99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 859,
Visits: 6.9K
|
+xJust an update on my refusal. After a complaint to the court I have now been granted a hearing. I am just waiting for a date now which the court have indicated is likely to be between December and March. Thank you to everyone for their help and advice. I will update after the hearing with the outcome. good luck!
|
|
|
|
|
Richard
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 66,
Visits: 449
|
Just an update on my refusal.
After a complaint to the court I have now been granted a hearing. I am just waiting for a date now which the court have indicated is likely to be between December and March.
Thank you to everyone for their help and advice. I will update after the hearing with the outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 1.8K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI have an internet SHPO and have applied to the court to have it discharged. I expected a hearing so that I could put across my arguments. The police disagree with my application but I feel their arguments are weak and that they have made a statement to the court which is factually correct but written in such a way to paint me in a bad light. For example they mention alerts that have occurred on my devices and have implied I am doing something wrong to cause these and therefore the SHPO and monitoring software needs to remain to monitor me. I have only been made aware of 2 of these alerts both of which were dismissed by my offender manager as not requiring any further action. They were trigged by a picture of my own children as a desktop background and an invoicing package that I use for work purposes. I am sure the other alerts must be false as well otherwise they would have taken action. Today the judge has refused the application saying a hearing is not required and as my offender manager has concerns he is refusing the application. Is it correct a judge can just dismiss without a hearing. He quoted CPR 31.5 (4) for him to be allowed to do it but I have looked at this and the next section CPR 31.5 (5) suggests he can't do this unless I have had a chance to make representations at a hearing. The whole reason I want to do this is so I can get my conviction spent and move on with my life. I know it is a battle if the police don't agree but I have changed so much since my conviction, I am no longer the same person I was back then. I am not a risk to the public and believe I can prove this. I thought this is what criteria they were looking for. Did you have a solicitor / barrister involved? Since you made the application to the courts, you should have been given every chance to produce evidence as to why the SHPO should be discharged, you can normally include a lot info and evidence with in the application. It is then down to the police to provide their evidence and reasons as to why it should not be discharged. It seems to me you were just unfortunate to be given a Judge who simply was not interested in your application. I recall when I submitted my own application I went in quite a lot of detail, quoting the Smith ruling proving the restrictions on my SHPO were disproportionate, the contact restriction infringes on my rights to family life, how the SHPO its self was preventing me from a change of circumstances (finding work and training) The first Judge I had was not interested in my application, so my barrister pushed for me to obtain more evidence on my work history. I was then appointed a new Judge who was more fair and willing to hear my application. Since the Judge has made the decision to dismiss your application, you need to look into if you can appeal it, or if you can just reapply normally. I was told by my judge that applying for discharge is a one time deal. I don't have a barrister/solicitor involved. My application gave a lot of detail as to why it should be discharged. The fact I have changed and the impact it has on my work and personal life. Most importantly stressing the reasons why I am not a risk to the public. I did look at getting a solicitor but the cost was too high. But as part of the work to give me the quote she did look at my application and said it was pretty good with strong grounds for it to be dismissed. My concerns on this is I believe the police have not given the full facts to the judge in their statement (a copy of which I have never seen prior to the judge giving his ruling). They have mentioned alerts I have had on my devices but in the context that these were bad alerts when in fact they were false alerts. They have also stated that the monitoring software is imperative to manage me when in fact the software is only installed on the laptop I use for my business and not on my personal devices. I also believe I should have been given the opportunity to have a hearing in court. I was expecting this to happen before a ruling was given I am worried about not being able to submit another application, I have asked the court about this and pointed out my concerns above. I am not aware of any rules preventing someone from applying more than once to have an SHPO discharged. The only test would be, has there been a change in circumstances since the previous application? But really this is about whether or not the judge correctly interpreted the CPR. I agree that they did not, so that should be grounds for an appeal in any case. Thanks it does look like the CPR was not interpreted correctly. His conclusion was that he could do it without a hearing because he had all the information to hand but I think he can only do this if he is to approve the discharge. In any other case a hearing should be allowed. If I do get to a hearing I may look into a solicitor to represent me. The quote I had last time was £5000 plus VAT but this seemed really steep. Does anyone know if this sounds reasonable or is it a high sky cost? Hi My sopo cost me £600 ish a couple of years back. Obviously I do not know the full in and outs yours is saying they have to do but does seem high. I believe his contact details are still the same. http://www.andrewstorchsolicitors.com/our-people/michael-phillips/ +44 7973953971 Good luck Further to this, sorry for not including it, I only used a solicitor for the first discharge of certain conditions. The second and full discharge I undertook myself. It took a long time to present the document in a manner that the Judge actually thought I had used a solicitor; at the hearing he actually thought I was the solicitor. Truth is I used the original document as a template to show how I should reference legal aspects and took all my emotions out of my points. Therefore believe that you can do it by yourself no matter the hurdles and time it takes to write the document. there is always others here to support you. Would you be prepared to share parts of your document? Obviously redact anything personal. Thanks Hi I did in a previous post but over the weekend I will attempt to put a draft template ie headings, together and see how we go from there. Have to remember that as my conditions were reduced until finally discharge, some content would refer back to those documents. One thing I learned was that if you can make the document easy to follow, clearing linking to "references" that makes the Judge's review easier and also shows you are serious in your intent. In the meantime I would advise you collate any "documents" that supported you together; be them from official channels ie positives from Probation, OM etc to family and friends who wrote to the Judge
Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------
This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30,
Visits: 3.8K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI have an internet SHPO and have applied to the court to have it discharged. I expected a hearing so that I could put across my arguments. The police disagree with my application but I feel their arguments are weak and that they have made a statement to the court which is factually correct but written in such a way to paint me in a bad light. For example they mention alerts that have occurred on my devices and have implied I am doing something wrong to cause these and therefore the SHPO and monitoring software needs to remain to monitor me. I have only been made aware of 2 of these alerts both of which were dismissed by my offender manager as not requiring any further action. They were trigged by a picture of my own children as a desktop background and an invoicing package that I use for work purposes. I am sure the other alerts must be false as well otherwise they would have taken action. Today the judge has refused the application saying a hearing is not required and as my offender manager has concerns he is refusing the application. Is it correct a judge can just dismiss without a hearing. He quoted CPR 31.5 (4) for him to be allowed to do it but I have looked at this and the next section CPR 31.5 (5) suggests he can't do this unless I have had a chance to make representations at a hearing. The whole reason I want to do this is so I can get my conviction spent and move on with my life. I know it is a battle if the police don't agree but I have changed so much since my conviction, I am no longer the same person I was back then. I am not a risk to the public and believe I can prove this. I thought this is what criteria they were looking for. Did you have a solicitor / barrister involved? Since you made the application to the courts, you should have been given every chance to produce evidence as to why the SHPO should be discharged, you can normally include a lot info and evidence with in the application. It is then down to the police to provide their evidence and reasons as to why it should not be discharged. It seems to me you were just unfortunate to be given a Judge who simply was not interested in your application. I recall when I submitted my own application I went in quite a lot of detail, quoting the Smith ruling proving the restrictions on my SHPO were disproportionate, the contact restriction infringes on my rights to family life, how the SHPO its self was preventing me from a change of circumstances (finding work and training) The first Judge I had was not interested in my application, so my barrister pushed for me to obtain more evidence on my work history. I was then appointed a new Judge who was more fair and willing to hear my application. Since the Judge has made the decision to dismiss your application, you need to look into if you can appeal it, or if you can just reapply normally. I was told by my judge that applying for discharge is a one time deal. I don't have a barrister/solicitor involved. My application gave a lot of detail as to why it should be discharged. The fact I have changed and the impact it has on my work and personal life. Most importantly stressing the reasons why I am not a risk to the public. I did look at getting a solicitor but the cost was too high. But as part of the work to give me the quote she did look at my application and said it was pretty good with strong grounds for it to be dismissed. My concerns on this is I believe the police have not given the full facts to the judge in their statement (a copy of which I have never seen prior to the judge giving his ruling). They have mentioned alerts I have had on my devices but in the context that these were bad alerts when in fact they were false alerts. They have also stated that the monitoring software is imperative to manage me when in fact the software is only installed on the laptop I use for my business and not on my personal devices. I also believe I should have been given the opportunity to have a hearing in court. I was expecting this to happen before a ruling was given I am worried about not being able to submit another application, I have asked the court about this and pointed out my concerns above. I am not aware of any rules preventing someone from applying more than once to have an SHPO discharged. The only test would be, has there been a change in circumstances since the previous application? But really this is about whether or not the judge correctly interpreted the CPR. I agree that they did not, so that should be grounds for an appeal in any case. Thanks it does look like the CPR was not interpreted correctly. His conclusion was that he could do it without a hearing because he had all the information to hand but I think he can only do this if he is to approve the discharge. In any other case a hearing should be allowed. If I do get to a hearing I may look into a solicitor to represent me. The quote I had last time was £5000 plus VAT but this seemed really steep. Does anyone know if this sounds reasonable or is it a high sky cost? Hi My sopo cost me £600 ish a couple of years back. Obviously I do not know the full in and outs yours is saying they have to do but does seem high. I believe his contact details are still the same. http://www.andrewstorchsolicitors.com/our-people/michael-phillips/ +44 7973953971 Good luck Further to this, sorry for not including it, I only used a solicitor for the first discharge of certain conditions. The second and full discharge I undertook myself. It took a long time to present the document in a manner that the Judge actually thought I had used a solicitor; at the hearing he actually thought I was the solicitor. Truth is I used the original document as a template to show how I should reference legal aspects and took all my emotions out of my points. Therefore believe that you can do it by yourself no matter the hurdles and time it takes to write the document. there is always others here to support you. Would you be prepared to share parts of your document? Obviously redact anything personal. Thanks
|
|
|
|