Search results

Dave We are not going around in circle. The basic question is here, if a RPI writes a "Travel Irregularity Report" and while taking the information for that report he does not mention that the information could be used as evidence in court, then a) Would that "Travel Irregularity Report"...

Ralph To extend your argument, if someone confesses to murdering a person in a church confession, should that person be let go. Come on.. there is a degree of judgement to be applied and context to be considered In the context of Railway Byelaw Prosecution my comments are completely...

AlterEgo When the TOC send a "Notice of Intention to Prosecute", they are trying to establish if there is reason for prosecution. If the TOC had such strong evidence, they should commence prosecution by asking the court to issue summons and not send "Notice of Intention to Prosecute". Many...

Ralph A simple google search reveals the following website: http://www.alway-associates.co.uk/legal-update/article.asp?id=55 I am not the one to argue with Court of Appeal rulings. Look for Walker Vs Wilshire in the first link. I see that you are as quick in calling someone's genuine...

Ralph When responding to "Notice of Intention to Prosecute", usually one gives their version of events and also mention if there is a possibility of settling. So if one writes such a letter under the headline "Without Prejudice" it would not be considered as evidence no matter what is...

Dave My comment about "Without Prejudice" is in reference to the "Notice of Intention to Prosecute" that the TOCs send before the actual prosecution commences. A grovelling apology as a reply to this letter is admission of guilt if the line "Without Prejudice" is not included in the reply.

Alter Ego / Ferret The TOCs should not be worried when a person takes this approach because they would have ample evidence for a successful prosecution, wouldn't they? As for the hundreds of lawyers that AlterEgo mentions, I am curious to know where that number comes from

Ferret My understanding of the CPS link is that a) defendant can request CPS to intervene in the case. The permission of the private prosector is not required b) Upon receiving the request the CPS c) CPS has the option to intervene Anyone with legal background would be able to help if this...

If say TOC's private prosecution team is taking a case to court over a trivial issue ( where passenger has clearly shown intent to buying ticket but does not have a valid ticket) under strict liability assumption, would it be possible to request the CPS to take over the prosecution? It is...

Owlman The point being: should not the the intrepretation of law and approach to prosecution by CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) be a reliable barometer to assess the validity of byelaw prosecution; more so considering these are private prosecutions brought on by TOC

I am not a lawyer. I am trying to get to first principles here. first of all the number of prosecutions that we hear are based on guilty pleas or admission of guilt. And people not attending to challenge the prosecution in court. There is regular advice given to "apologize grovelling to the...

Ralph The conviction results in a criminal record consequences of which can be severe for people in certain professions. They can loose their jobs. There is a known case of a migrant who was refused Indefinite Leave to Remain on the basis that he had a criminal record as he was convicted under...

DaveNewCastle Sweet Vs Parsley is the authority on if a legal statute is strict liability. The case lays down the following checks Based on the conditions and reading the Railways Act of 2005; I believe it is possible that byelaws are after all not strict liability

Island and Ferret My question is when reading through legislation that give force to these byelaws, how do we determine if they are strict liability laws? Thanks

Hello All I keep seeing in the forums that a breach of Railway Byelaw 18 is a strict liability offence. Why is this so? How does one determine if a particular byelaw is Strict Liability? Thanks

Hello WillPS My message on CPS guidance on Byelaw prosecution has been deleted. The reason given is that my conclusion is incorrect. I have requested that I allow be posted the link alone and the readers can make their own conclusion. Meanwhile, I see your post also is deleted. It would be...

swt_passenger Given that we have established that Penalty Fares Regulation 1994 is the reason why Byelaw 17 is excluded from Enforcement, the natural question that flows is whether the Penalty Fare Regulation 1994 distinguishes between passengers travelling to a CTA station Vs non-CTA station...

I think you are right. This is a link to a FOI request about TFL's training manual for RPIs. Link Look at page 10. Breach of Byelaw 17 is covered by Penalty Fares Act 1994

swt_passenger, I understand that bit. But, what is the underlying thought process to apply penalty fare procedures to a CTA area and other procedures to a non-CTA area. Were there any prior (prior to the byelaws were drafted) legislations that necessiated this? If you look at it, how a...

Now that swt_passenger has resolved the issue of definition of "Compulsory Ticket Areas", back to the original question Why does Railway Byelaw under its Enforcement Section(Clause 24) exclude breach of Byelaw 17?