|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 1.8K
|
+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.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 8.3K
|
+xMy sopo was removed about 10 years ago, give or take. It cost about 800 quid back then. I can't pass the details on as the barrister who dealt with it for me is now a judge. But, if it helps, I just got as much stuff together to show what I'd proactively done to change. That combined with my barrister arguing that I couldn't return to the UK until my sopo was removed as as soon as it would be my conviction would be spent and therefore not need to be disclosed. It was resisted, actually two barrister ls turned up, one for the police and a CPS one. They really didn't want it to happen. My barrister was smart though. They (the opposition) argued they couldn't realistically judge my risk until I returned to the UK, so asked the judge to keep it until I returned. The judge wasn't stupid, they had all my evidence and removed my sopo. So I would say, just show that you've changed, what you have done and want to do with your life. They just want you to succeed at the end of the day, if you give them reason to. Unlock has information and advice on what you might want to include in your representations on their website here. You could have a look at that to get an idea of whether you fancy doing it yourself.
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
expatofff
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 27,
Visits: 223
|
My sopo was removed about 10 years ago, give or take. It cost about 800 quid back then. I can't pass the details on as the barrister who dealt with it for me is now a judge.
But, if it helps, I just got as much stuff together to show what I'd proactively done to change. That combined with my barrister arguing that I couldn't return to the UK until my sopo was removed as as soon as it would be my conviction would be spent and therefore not need to be disclosed.
It was resisted, actually two barrister ls turned up, one for the police and a CPS one. They really didn't want it to happen. My barrister was smart though. They (the opposition) argued they couldn't realistically judge my risk until I returned to the UK, so asked the judge to keep it until I returned.
The judge wasn't stupid, they had all my evidence and removed my sopo.
So I would say, just show that you've changed, what you have done and want to do with your life. They just want you to succeed at the end of the day, if you give them reason to.
|
|
|
|
|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 1.8K
|
+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
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 66,
Visits: 449
|
+x+x+x+x+xGenerally matters in Crown Courts are dealt with by the "Resident Judge", who is usually a named Judge and doesn't often change. Therefore, submitting a further application might only serve to wind them up. In any event, from my reading (and I have to qualify this by saying I am not, nor are any of us at Unlock, legal experts), the Judge under CPR did not have the power to effectively administratively dismiss the case, without offering you an opportunity to make representations on why a hearing was needed. In this instance, as your application has been determined (even if potentially wrongly), arguably it could potentially be seen as an abuse of process of the court to make a similar or identical application so quickly. I'd advise appealing to the Court of Appeal. The route of appeal against a decision, or refusal, to vary or discharge a SHPO is to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division, despite the variation itself being considered a civil matter.
The route is via S353 of the Sentencing Act 2020 which gives a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal (if variation took place at Crown Court), or appeal to the Crown Court if variation took place in Magistrates or Youth Court.
https://forum.unlock.org.uk/FindPost35645.aspx Thanks I have looked at the appeal router and there is a cost to this. I haven't made any decision which way to act yet but I am aware I only have 21 days after the decision to appeal. I am hoping to be able to get some legal advice this week as well. I didn't realise courts had a resident judge so can understand it could annoy them if they saw the same application again especially if I am complaining about the way it was handled. My question would be, how long is an appeal going to take, versus making another application to the resident judge in say 6 months time? When it comes to abuse of the process, I get why making an application within a few days of the last one being refused would be seen as abuse, but then how long do you have to wait? 6 months? 12 months? Going to the court of appeal is going to be costly and not likely to be over quickly. I would give it 6 months minimum and apply again. Plenty of things could happen in that time. The judge might retire for example, or they may just forget all about you. # It may also be worthwhile using your time now to discuss with the PPU why they are objecting. If you can get them to agree you are not a risk, then the judge will almost certainly discharge the SHPO next time. I know that people dislike them and often the relationship is hostile, but you have nothing to lose by doing this. My PPU is objecting as she claims she can't manage me without the SHPO in place. She has told me this verbally on her last visit. In her statement to the court she claims that the software monitoring on my devices is the only way she can monitor me. She misses the point (whether deliberately or unintentionally) that the monitoring software is only on my work machine and not on my personal devices and no issues have been found on these unmonitored devices in the last 3 years since they took the monitoring software off due to it not working correctly. Personally I thought management was more than the SHPO. Our relationship is not too bad. Very formal I find her okay to deal with ...my biggest problem on recent visits have been the people who check my devices. I have found them difficult, the last one I had was getting worked up on a reply I made on twitter . She was trying to get me to say what I had replied to and what I said....I couldn't honestly remember and seeing she had the device in front of her and knew exactly what I said it just seemed pointless. For clarity the original post and comment I made was perfectly okay. I agree with Danx. You have a strong case, if only you can get a judge to look at at it. The SHPO is clearly stopping you from moving on with your life. Seems like the obvious solution is to make the PPU an offer. Tell them that you will voluntarily agree to have the monitoring software on your device, if they will withdraw their objections to your SHPO being discharged. It doesnt really matter if they agree or not, because the fact that you made the offer, shows the judge that you are addressing their concerns. Also ask the PPU to record in their notes, that you have made the offer to them. That way, they cannot deny it later on. How often are they visiting you? If it is once a year, that indicates they think you are low risk. Once every 6 months indicates medium risk. Doing a SAR also will tell you what they are saying about you behind your back. If anything in there is wrong, make a note of it, because it demonstrates that they do not understand your risk. My risk level is low as this was quoted from the police statement by the judge. My Offender Manager said I was low risk due to my compliance and because the monitoring software was in place. Failing to mention the monitoring software is only on 1 of my devices and not on the other 2. So I believe in a hearing that point could be disproved. My visits are annual but I did have an unexpected visit shortly after putting the discharge application in. I believe this was to look on my unmonitored devices for any evidence to counter the discharge application. The excuse they used was that it was to discuss my foreign travel notification but that could have been done by phone or email. It is a good suggestion about offering to have the monitoring software on voluntarily. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
punter99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 859,
Visits: 6.9K
|
+x+x+x+xGenerally matters in Crown Courts are dealt with by the "Resident Judge", who is usually a named Judge and doesn't often change. Therefore, submitting a further application might only serve to wind them up. In any event, from my reading (and I have to qualify this by saying I am not, nor are any of us at Unlock, legal experts), the Judge under CPR did not have the power to effectively administratively dismiss the case, without offering you an opportunity to make representations on why a hearing was needed. In this instance, as your application has been determined (even if potentially wrongly), arguably it could potentially be seen as an abuse of process of the court to make a similar or identical application so quickly. I'd advise appealing to the Court of Appeal. The route of appeal against a decision, or refusal, to vary or discharge a SHPO is to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division, despite the variation itself being considered a civil matter.
The route is via S353 of the Sentencing Act 2020 which gives a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal (if variation took place at Crown Court), or appeal to the Crown Court if variation took place in Magistrates or Youth Court.
https://forum.unlock.org.uk/FindPost35645.aspx Thanks I have looked at the appeal router and there is a cost to this. I haven't made any decision which way to act yet but I am aware I only have 21 days after the decision to appeal. I am hoping to be able to get some legal advice this week as well. I didn't realise courts had a resident judge so can understand it could annoy them if they saw the same application again especially if I am complaining about the way it was handled. My question would be, how long is an appeal going to take, versus making another application to the resident judge in say 6 months time? When it comes to abuse of the process, I get why making an application within a few days of the last one being refused would be seen as abuse, but then how long do you have to wait? 6 months? 12 months? Going to the court of appeal is going to be costly and not likely to be over quickly. I would give it 6 months minimum and apply again. Plenty of things could happen in that time. The judge might retire for example, or they may just forget all about you. # It may also be worthwhile using your time now to discuss with the PPU why they are objecting. If you can get them to agree you are not a risk, then the judge will almost certainly discharge the SHPO next time. I know that people dislike them and often the relationship is hostile, but you have nothing to lose by doing this. My PPU is objecting as she claims she can't manage me without the SHPO in place. She has told me this verbally on her last visit. In her statement to the court she claims that the software monitoring on my devices is the only way she can monitor me. She misses the point (whether deliberately or unintentionally) that the monitoring software is only on my work machine and not on my personal devices and no issues have been found on these unmonitored devices in the last 3 years since they took the monitoring software off due to it not working correctly. Personally I thought management was more than the SHPO. Our relationship is not too bad. Very formal I find her okay to deal with ...my biggest problem on recent visits have been the people who check my devices. I have found them difficult, the last one I had was getting worked up on a reply I made on twitter . She was trying to get me to say what I had replied to and what I said....I couldn't honestly remember and seeing she had the device in front of her and knew exactly what I said it just seemed pointless. For clarity the original post and comment I made was perfectly okay. I agree with Danx. You have a strong case, if only you can get a judge to look at at it. The SHPO is clearly stopping you from moving on with your life. Seems like the obvious solution is to make the PPU an offer. Tell them that you will voluntarily agree to have the monitoring software on your device, if they will withdraw their objections to your SHPO being discharged. It doesnt really matter if they agree or not, because the fact that you made the offer, shows the judge that you are addressing their concerns. Also ask the PPU to record in their notes, that you have made the offer to them. That way, they cannot deny it later on. How often are they visiting you? If it is once a year, that indicates they think you are low risk. Once every 6 months indicates medium risk. Doing a SAR also will tell you what they are saying about you behind your back. If anything in there is wrong, make a note of it, because it demonstrates that they do not understand your risk.
|
|
|
|
|
xDanx
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 408,
Visits: 12K
|
+x+x+x+xGenerally matters in Crown Courts are dealt with by the "Resident Judge", who is usually a named Judge and doesn't often change. Therefore, submitting a further application might only serve to wind them up. In any event, from my reading (and I have to qualify this by saying I am not, nor are any of us at Unlock, legal experts), the Judge under CPR did not have the power to effectively administratively dismiss the case, without offering you an opportunity to make representations on why a hearing was needed. In this instance, as your application has been determined (even if potentially wrongly), arguably it could potentially be seen as an abuse of process of the court to make a similar or identical application so quickly. I'd advise appealing to the Court of Appeal. The route of appeal against a decision, or refusal, to vary or discharge a SHPO is to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division, despite the variation itself being considered a civil matter.
The route is via S353 of the Sentencing Act 2020 which gives a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal (if variation took place at Crown Court), or appeal to the Crown Court if variation took place in Magistrates or Youth Court.
https://forum.unlock.org.uk/FindPost35645.aspx Thanks I have looked at the appeal router and there is a cost to this. I haven't made any decision which way to act yet but I am aware I only have 21 days after the decision to appeal. I am hoping to be able to get some legal advice this week as well. I didn't realise courts had a resident judge so can understand it could annoy them if they saw the same application again especially if I am complaining about the way it was handled. My question would be, how long is an appeal going to take, versus making another application to the resident judge in say 6 months time? When it comes to abuse of the process, I get why making an application within a few days of the last one being refused would be seen as abuse, but then how long do you have to wait? 6 months? 12 months? Going to the court of appeal is going to be costly and not likely to be over quickly. I would give it 6 months minimum and apply again. Plenty of things could happen in that time. The judge might retire for example, or they may just forget all about you. # It may also be worthwhile using your time now to discuss with the PPU why they are objecting. If you can get them to agree you are not a risk, then the judge will almost certainly discharge the SHPO next time. I know that people dislike them and often the relationship is hostile, but you have nothing to lose by doing this. My PPU is objecting as she claims she can't manage me without the SHPO in place. She has told me this verbally on her last visit. In her statement to the court she claims that the software monitoring on my devices is the only way she can monitor me. She misses the point (whether deliberately or unintentionally) that the monitoring software is only on my work machine and not on my personal devices and no issues have been found on these unmonitored devices in the last 3 years since they took the monitoring software off due to it not working correctly. Personally I thought management was more than the SHPO. Our relationship is not too bad. Very formal I find her okay to deal with ...my biggest problem on recent visits have been the people who check my devices. I have found them difficult, the last one I had was getting worked up on a reply I made on twitter . She was trying to get me to say what I had replied to and what I said....I couldn't honestly remember and seeing she had the device in front of her and knew exactly what I said it just seemed pointless. For clarity the original post and comment I made was perfectly okay. As Punter99 said, if you can speak to her and get her to admit to you that you pose little to no risk. Make sure you have it recorded. If the day comes you do end up in court to have your hearing and she tells you no, you are not a risk. Then tells the judge something else claiming you are of high risk, you have the recording to back you up. Along side the information you gather from the subject access request, which usually takes around a month to be forwarded to you. It would take some time to read through it all and alter parts of your original application, so I think 6 months is a decent time to send another application. But I will say, be very accurate with what information you are requesting, such as reports made about you from your PPU. Either that or you go down the variation route, you could argue the fact she only has the monitor software on your work laptop and not your personal devices. So you could request to have the monitoring rule removed from the SHPO. Along side any other disproportionate restrictions you feel need to go. Seeing as you are 6 years into your SHPO, you could even request to reduce the length from 10 years to 7 years. Stressing the fact you have been compliant and have had no breaches. I dare say you could likely include what happened with your original application to discharge pointing out the fact it was dismissed with out a proper hearing. This is just my opinion, but I think your biggest selling point to have the SHPO discharged is your business. Most Judges are only interested in what change of circumstances have been made since being sentenced, in your case. You are running your own business (from home) which is struggling because of the SHPO, as you previously stated. You can not get the insurances to expand your business. Unable to employ anyone for the same reason, which therefor means. The SHPO it's self is preventing a change of circumstance by preventing your business to grow. During my application process I had a number of court appearances, from the time I made my application to having it discharged. Took just over a year for me. This is mostly because my PPU never turned up until the Judge forced him too. The Judge was livid and actually stated in court that had I paid for my legal fees, he would have ordered reimbursement from Police.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 66,
Visits: 449
|
+x+x+xGenerally matters in Crown Courts are dealt with by the "Resident Judge", who is usually a named Judge and doesn't often change. Therefore, submitting a further application might only serve to wind them up. In any event, from my reading (and I have to qualify this by saying I am not, nor are any of us at Unlock, legal experts), the Judge under CPR did not have the power to effectively administratively dismiss the case, without offering you an opportunity to make representations on why a hearing was needed. In this instance, as your application has been determined (even if potentially wrongly), arguably it could potentially be seen as an abuse of process of the court to make a similar or identical application so quickly. I'd advise appealing to the Court of Appeal. The route of appeal against a decision, or refusal, to vary or discharge a SHPO is to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division, despite the variation itself being considered a civil matter.
The route is via S353 of the Sentencing Act 2020 which gives a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal (if variation took place at Crown Court), or appeal to the Crown Court if variation took place in Magistrates or Youth Court.
https://forum.unlock.org.uk/FindPost35645.aspx Thanks I have looked at the appeal router and there is a cost to this. I haven't made any decision which way to act yet but I am aware I only have 21 days after the decision to appeal. I am hoping to be able to get some legal advice this week as well. I didn't realise courts had a resident judge so can understand it could annoy them if they saw the same application again especially if I am complaining about the way it was handled. My question would be, how long is an appeal going to take, versus making another application to the resident judge in say 6 months time? When it comes to abuse of the process, I get why making an application within a few days of the last one being refused would be seen as abuse, but then how long do you have to wait? 6 months? 12 months? Going to the court of appeal is going to be costly and not likely to be over quickly. I would give it 6 months minimum and apply again. Plenty of things could happen in that time. The judge might retire for example, or they may just forget all about you. # It may also be worthwhile using your time now to discuss with the PPU why they are objecting. If you can get them to agree you are not a risk, then the judge will almost certainly discharge the SHPO next time. I know that people dislike them and often the relationship is hostile, but you have nothing to lose by doing this. My PPU is objecting as she claims she can't manage me without the SHPO in place. She has told me this verbally on her last visit. In her statement to the court she claims that the software monitoring on my devices is the only way she can monitor me. She misses the point (whether deliberately or unintentionally) that the monitoring software is only on my work machine and not on my personal devices and no issues have been found on these unmonitored devices in the last 3 years since they took the monitoring software off due to it not working correctly. Personally I thought management was more than the SHPO. Our relationship is not too bad. Very formal I find her okay to deal with ...my biggest problem on recent visits have been the people who check my devices. I have found them difficult, the last one I had was getting worked up on a reply I made on twitter . She was trying to get me to say what I had replied to and what I said....I couldn't honestly remember and seeing she had the device in front of her and knew exactly what I said it just seemed pointless. For clarity the original post and comment I made was perfectly okay.
|
|
|
|
|
punter99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 859,
Visits: 6.9K
|
+x+xGenerally matters in Crown Courts are dealt with by the "Resident Judge", who is usually a named Judge and doesn't often change. Therefore, submitting a further application might only serve to wind them up. In any event, from my reading (and I have to qualify this by saying I am not, nor are any of us at Unlock, legal experts), the Judge under CPR did not have the power to effectively administratively dismiss the case, without offering you an opportunity to make representations on why a hearing was needed. In this instance, as your application has been determined (even if potentially wrongly), arguably it could potentially be seen as an abuse of process of the court to make a similar or identical application so quickly. I'd advise appealing to the Court of Appeal. The route of appeal against a decision, or refusal, to vary or discharge a SHPO is to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division, despite the variation itself being considered a civil matter.
The route is via S353 of the Sentencing Act 2020 which gives a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal (if variation took place at Crown Court), or appeal to the Crown Court if variation took place in Magistrates or Youth Court.
https://forum.unlock.org.uk/FindPost35645.aspx Thanks I have looked at the appeal router and there is a cost to this. I haven't made any decision which way to act yet but I am aware I only have 21 days after the decision to appeal. I am hoping to be able to get some legal advice this week as well. I didn't realise courts had a resident judge so can understand it could annoy them if they saw the same application again especially if I am complaining about the way it was handled. My question would be, how long is an appeal going to take, versus making another application to the resident judge in say 6 months time? When it comes to abuse of the process, I get why making an application within a few days of the last one being refused would be seen as abuse, but then how long do you have to wait? 6 months? 12 months? Going to the court of appeal is going to be costly and not likely to be over quickly. I would give it 6 months minimum and apply again. Plenty of things could happen in that time. The judge might retire for example, or they may just forget all about you. # It may also be worthwhile using your time now to discuss with the PPU why they are objecting. If you can get them to agree you are not a risk, then the judge will almost certainly discharge the SHPO next time. I know that people dislike them and often the relationship is hostile, but you have nothing to lose by doing this.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 66,
Visits: 449
|
+xHi Richie, I hope it goes well. I applied for discharge a few years ago and had similarly frustrating experience. It wasn't thrown out but the outcome wasn't great either. I echo what everyone else has said, I got a SAR and submitted all the positives, I had no breaches etc and this was 6/7 years after conviction. Have a think about what to say if you're speaking, don't make excuses or slag off police (which is so tempting) - purely be positive about yourself and dig deep into the HOW you've changed. As you can imagine a lot of people say they've changed and when it comes down to having pressure applied, haven't truly changed at all. When it came to the police, they only agreed to one change before the hearing. However, their representation in court didn't talk about post-conviction at all, he just went over the original offending and the images etc. I was surprised how negative they were and it was unhelpful because as far as we're concerned we're here to talk about life post-convictioon, not feel as if we're on trial all over again. This might just be my force, they're particularly negative. All in all the judge agreed to the one change but didn't really explain why he wouldn't fully discharge it. I did hire a barrister and they explained I have no kids, I've held down my self-employed work, all annual notifications done on time, unannounced visits etc I explained being unspent for this length was relentless and achieving nothing but extra financial burden in already difficult times and unneccesary disclosures (bane of my life), but it all seemingly wasn't good enough. I think judges are reluctant to go against what another judge has decided but I know there have been successes documented on here. As with every area, there just seems to be inconsistencies everywhere. So I would suggest proceed with hope and caution. If your SHPO as it stands is managable for the duration, as difficult as we all know they are, things won't get worse, but anything more positive will be a huge bonus. Thank you for your supportive words. It is not the SHPO itself that bothers me, I don't really care about having my devices monitored/checked and having to register new devices. The big issue for me is that Conviction would be spent in March next year if I can get the SHPO discharged. At the moment having to declare my conviction creates many hurdles for me especially around running a business with my partner. It is impossible to get anyone to insure the business which leaves us open to potential risks, it also means we can't employ anyone as I can not get employers liability insurance for them which is a legal requirement. This means we are doing the jobs of around 4 people and desperately need the help. It also means our whole business has to be run from home as I can't get a business unit to run it from (insurance and background checks) which means family and work life often collides. There are the normal things like personal insurance etc having to get higher quotes. When I was convicted I was a different person, I was under a lot of stress I had a recent family bereavement and I was not acting like myself. Wind on a few years and I am a different person, not under the same sort of stress and I am myself. I can talk to people about my family about my problems. There is no way I am going to return to the place that caused my offending. I have too much to lose if I offend again, I have a business I have built up and my family who forgave me once but I know a second time that is not going to happen. I have completed all the courses they have asked me to, I have complied with every part of the registration process. I have been patient with the police even when I believe they are being unreasonable and difficult. My risk level has come down from high when I was first convicted to low now. What is annoying about a SHPO is that it means your conviction can never be spent whilst it is active, however you can be on the SOR and your conviction is spent.
|
|
|
|