|
UK Tree Care - http://www.oak-wood.co.uk/uktc/
I wish to comment on the digital photo points. Digital
'pictures / images' are used in courts all around the
world. Any picture or movie no
matter what it's origin can be altered. Many images for court evidence
have
to be digitally enhanced or
altered. Your digital evidence and it's credence, are a matter of 'your'
personal
credibility in the
eyes of the court. I have
experience of courts and images also, but 'I' have good credibility
with the courts.
Just for the record; speed trap pics are digital now, most
CCTV evidence has to be cleaned up and
digitally
enhanced, pornography on the net is digital and is
prosecuted, most crime fighting databases are
digital
based as are insurance image databases. Need I continue.
If you are accepted as a reliable witness,
your
evidence has to be accepted also.
As for an LA that would discredit themselves as
described, the will never be trusted in a court again,
and I
would publicly hang them !
Ron ............................
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 6:37
PM
Subject: Original TPOs
UK Tree Care - http://www.oak-wood.co.uk/uktc/
Richard Perrins is in error - serious error.
A digital copy of a TPO is NOT acceptable in Court.
The Original, signed and sealed order is the Legal Document and if this cannot
be produced in Court, then it does not exist. I speak from first-hand
experience. I have acted in cases where prosecutions have failed because
the Original Order could not be produced. A Judge can only act upon the
Legal Document and, as all TPO prosecutions come under the Police and Criminal
Evidence Act 1984, then all the defendant has to do is to shoe 'reasonable
doubt' without the origianl legal instrument - that's a 'no brainer' for any
competent Solicitor / Barrister.
On the same matter, digital evidence of any sort is not
acceptable and that goes to digital photos as well as it is too easy to alter
or tamper with them. Again I speak from experience where it was shown
that an LPA had 'doctored / altered' a photo for entirely benign reasons -
Case Dismissed!!
Also, Mr Perrins is somewhat patronising in his
approach. I am an experienced consultant and it is not beyond by
abilities to assess and understand 'An Old Order' I can figure it
out. We in the private sector are not stupid, in fact, in many ways we
assist the LPA's to detect serious flaws in their TPO files and systems.
Usually for free as part of a job we are doing for a client. So please,
don't patronise us and we will not publish all the 'Cock-Ups' we find in LPAs
TPO files. Boy that would make a good publication? 'The A
to Z of TPO Errors' it would be as good as any Dennis Norden 'Out
Takes' Programme. And if we identified the LPAs as well - then the s**t
would hit the fan but not as much as if we identified the Officers in post at
the time the 'cock up' occurred - boy would that compartmentalise some
people??
Come to think about it, it would make a good regular feature
for TreeLine or the AA NewsLetter - we could style it on the sports programme
Goal of the Month - how about 'TPO Cock-Up' of the Month'
or 'Top Ten TPO Cock Ups' or taken further we could
offer an annual award for the year's most humourous TPO C/U or the most costly
to the LPA Tax Payers
Of course the LPAs or NATO could respond with
'Consultant Cock-Ups' that would also be fun..
Seriously though, the message is, Digital Data is fine for
information only, but in Court, you must have the Original.
Dealga
O'C ______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxx.com Start Your Own FREE
Email List at http://www.listbot.com/links/joinlb
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxx.com
Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/links/joinlb
| 
