Update ...Kermit

[psychotic]

life's support

i think today is an angry day for me... i feel like if there is a higher deity to look after all of us... they are definitely not looking out for all of us... i think from today i will have to look out for myself and stop self-pitying... i think its just fate that i have overcome this obstacle and the higher deity may have designed that for me to become an even stronger person... as for all of us here... i am with you guys all the way... full support no matter what... i think through this experience i can tell the human compassion, especially in strangers... so in my mind i will fight for all of you and focus on getting the best outcome possible!

[edinguy]

Hi Kermit,

So sorry to hear about your partner being sent to jail for a crime he did not commit, I fear I could be joining him very soon if the system gets it’s way.

Will Kermit be eligible for release after half the 10 year sentence? It sickens me so much people who have no relation and no interest in these men/woman can take measures like this without any solid evidence. The fact he knows you love him and will never stop should be of some comfort to him in these difficult times

[Kermit]

update

Hi Edinguy

I dont understand how anyone can be found guilty of a crime with no evidence just the word of someone that has not only changed her story on not one but three occasions and the jury are not made aware of this, nor about other claims she has made as its classed as hearsay until she reports it to the police, her mother was allowed to say she knew of another account her daughter had told her about but no one from the defence side where allowed to say what she had told not just Me Kermit or my daughter but also several defence witnesses nor where the jury allowed to hear about this. I have no trust in our system and will never trust the police as long as i live! How can a guilty verdict be given when the Jury only heard a 1/2 of the case, even though we have been through it and seen it for ourselves i still cant believe it happens, It absolutely disgusts me!

Kermit is doing ok as long as he has his medication morning and night he is coping, the mornings are like a nightmare everyday for him as he has severe claustrophobia which brings on anxiety attacks.
We are fighting his conviction in the appeals court and just waiting on there decision.

Now we have to pray that a system that has failed us once does not again. We are pushing for the appeals court to look at all the new defence evidence showing kermits accuser has lied to the courts and its not hearsay but factual!

Every week we have a schedule of who visits Kermit and who is next and that helps us as well as Kermit as he knows we will never stop fighting on his behalf.
He has been told he has 4yrs and 9mths to serve and already has done 5mths,although he says the days go fast, we have found it to go slow.

He has been told never to accept any courses other than the English Maths and IT lessons which he is doing now he is back on the wing and no longer on 24hr suicide watch, but checked every hour,but thats only thanks to the medication the prison have put him on to help keep him calm and he also has a paper bag to breathe into when he struggles with prison life.

The cps and police tried in court to get an IPP attached but the judge disallowed this,we have been told that if he does any courses an IPP will automatically be attached and then he could end up spending longer in prison.
Kermit will never accept any courses to address his conviction as he is innocent.

I hope you do not find yourself in the same situation as Kermit.But if you do! just make sure you stay on here and get as much help as you can, or if thats not possible get your family or a friend to ask questions or ask for help on your behalf.
I hope your family and true friends are standing by you and helping you in anyway they can!
Kermit has support from both our families and all our friends and i no that is helping keep him alive and trying to fight and every visit we make to see him we remind him we are all there for him and love him very much.
Kermits fiancee

[Rights Fighter]

The cps and police tried in court to get an IPP attached but the judge disallowed this,we have been told that if he does any courses an IPP will automatically be attached and then he could end up spending longer in prison.

What utter twaddle - it really does annoy me when people (prison gossip/probation) claim stuff like this.

An IPP can ONLY be ordered by a judge not by probation or a prison Governor.

An IPP can only be ordered at trial or if the Crown appeal the sentence at the Court of Appeal in London and then they have to have good grounds for doing that - refusing to undertake courses is not one of them.

I am assuming you meant to say "we have been told that if he does NOT DO any courses an IPP will automatically be attached". Undertaking offence related courses would help him get out earlier.

[Kermit]

Hi RF

RF... thanks for that info!

Kermit was given that advice by a probation officer that he saw some weeks ago.

The IPP was refused by the judge and the CPS and police where told to shut up and sit down in the court when they tried getting it applied

Kermit has been told if he accepts any course to do with rehabilitating sex-offender treatment programs then he is admitting guilt and the police and cps can then apply through the court for the IPP to be attached as Kermit would be admitting guilt thats the courses i meant and that is never going to happen.

[Rights Fighter]

That makes no sense at all - I fear for the intelligence of some probation officers. If somebody undertakes the course then their risk to the public lessens became they are doing something about it. It's those who continue to deny it that are considered to be the biggest risk.

Even if an inmate who is protesting his innocence agrees to undertake such an offence related course (and then fails to do so) then there will still be no chance to appeal later on should new evidence come to light.

Agreeing to do the course (due to pressure) even if he then does not do it will suggest that he has admitted guilt..........

The prison and probation CANNOT cause an inmate's sentence to become an IPP. Utter Bolloc*s! Only a judge can do that at trial or on appeal - and as I said before, the appeal application has to have merit. Refusing to undertake an offence related course is not meritorious.

Probation can prevent a parole application succeeding which would mean that the inmate would then have to serve the 2/3rds - better that than lose all chance of appeal should fresh evidence come to light later on down the line.

Kermit should take advice from a decent prison law solicitor and not listen to prison gossip or probation/prison officers.


PLEASE TAKE NOTE: PROBATION OFFICERS WILL LIE THROUGH THEIR TEETH TO GET WHAT THEY WANT.

[Saffron]

Agreed RF!
Since when has the PO or prison staff been able to enforce an IPP?! An IPP is a sentence, and POs/prison staff have absolutely no control over sentencing. As RF says, they can deny parole applications, but that is as far as their power extends in terms of sentence.

My experience of probation officers is that they don't take the trouble to actually familiarise themselves with their subjects. R's PO told him he had to sign the SOR and refused to believe him when he said that he didn't. We had to verbally stamp our feet and get letters from legal team & plod to prove that he didn't have to sign it. She told me "It's not the end of the world for him to be on the SOR" but as far as I was concerned it was the end of the world. Not having to sign the SOR was the only thing that we could take as a positive out of the whole sorry debacle.

She also berated R for not having found a job that was similar to the one he had before, which was a management role....Although she never offered him any advice or help on how to go about it. He had got a temporary job working as a packer in a warehouse, but had found that through his own efforts with absolutely no help from her. She also told him that his family probably hated him, but were pretending not to.

Grrr, just thinking about it makes my blood boil. Sorry for ranting!

[help-please]

Agreed RF!
Since when has the PO or prison staff been able to enforce an IPP?! An IPP is a sentence, and POs/prison staff have absolutely no control over sentencing. As RF says, they can deny parole applications, but that is as far as their power extends in terms of sentence.

My experience of probation officers is that they don't take the trouble to actually familiarise themselves with their subjects. R's PO told him he had to sign the SOR and refused to believe him when he said that he didn't. We had to verbally stamp our feet and get letters from legal team & plod to prove that he didn't have to sign it. She told me "It's not the end of the world for him to be on the SOR" but as far as I was concerned it was the end of the world. Not having to sign the SOR was the only thing that we could take as a positive out of the whole sorry debacle.

She also berated R for not having found a job that was similar to the one he had before, which was a management role....Although she never offered him any advice or help on how to go about it. He had got a temporary job working as a packer in a warehouse, but had found that through his own efforts with absolutely no help from her. She also told him that his family probably hated him, but were pretending not to.

Grrr, just thinking about it makes my blood boil. Sorry for ranting!

How did he manage not to sign the SOR ? does this mean as far as the system is concern he is on the SOR but has not been signed , or can anyone refuse to sign the SOR regardless of been found guility....sorry if i have missed a vital point in your past experince .

another thing does anyone know , if a alledged offence happened before the SOR was introduced , can the person , if found gulity be made to sign something that was not enforce at the time of there alledged offence if found gulity.

I had a quick read of the european human rights and part 7 , says that no law can be applied retrospectively , so i assume that would include the SOR ?!?

[psychotic]

well wishes for kermit

just wanted to drop a line wish kermit to stay strong and all the best

[Saffron]

He didn't have to sign the SOR because the judge said at sentencing that he didn't think it was necessary. The "Victim" was in her mid-20s, apparently this had some bearing on it as she was not a minor. As far as I know it is exceptionally unusual for someone convicted of a sexual offence to not have to sign the SOR. This was back in 2004 so the law may have changed since then.

As far as criminal records go, it will be on his file forever. Sexual offences are never considered "spent" unlike pretty much every other offence. However, not having to sign the SOR means that he is not on the Register and his "offence" will only show up on a CRB check.

If you are ordered to sign the SOR you cannot refuse to do so. I am not sure that retrospective law applies in sexual offences, but I could be wrong. In other words, if the "crime" predates the SOR you can still be ordered to sign it.

I am happy to be corrected by other members!

[help-please]

hi saffron , thank you for your detailed reply , i guess a solicitor would be the best person to deal with retrospective things , this is what is said on wikipedia :-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europea...n_Human_Rights

Article 7 - retrospectivity
Main article: Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Prohibits the retrospective criminalisation of acts and omissions. No person may be punished for an act that was not a criminal offence at the time of its commission. The article states that a criminal offence is one under either national or international law, which would permit a party to prosecute someone for a crime which was not illegal under their domestic law at the time, so long as it was prohibited by international law. The Article also prohibits a heavier penalty being imposed than was applicable at the time when the criminal act was committed.

i guess the part about the heavier penalty , would in my own none lawyer based mind , suggest that if the sex offenders register was not in force at the time of the alleged criminal offence if found to be guilty then surely it should not be signed ?

Does anyone know if :- Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights is applicable to all of the u.k courts of law ?

And when it states "party" does this also include the Queens prosecution ?

p.s if you think this should become a new thread or if i am high jacking this thread , please let me know i shall repost as a new thread....

[help-please]

p.p.s Kermit....if my memory serves me correctly , i think your husband is alleged to of commited the offences many many years ago , i wonder if he has been given a fair sentance based on the European human rights act....i read about a judge that had to lower a sentance because the the offences took part pre 1997 , intitally he was given 6 years , but it was reduced to 4.5 years .

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/82713...re_in_the_80s/

it was just a thought .

[Rights Fighter]

Look at it another way - if somebody is 100% guilty of the sexual offences they are convicted on, would you not want them to be on the SOR so that they can at least have some sort of monitoring?

Inclusion on the SOR is NOT part of the sentence in any event so Article 7 does not apply here.

I think the judge in Mr Saffron's case may have believed him to be innocent. The age of the alleged victim has no bearing on inclusion as had he really been guilty he could well go on to assault another person of a similar age.

In Mr S's case it could be that the judge exercised his own discretion.

[Saffron]

Have to say that I think you are right there RF. The judge was a circuit judge, so by rights the sentence would not necessarily have been passed by him. However after the verdict he stated that he would hold onto the case for sentencing....hence why the trial was at Birmingham Crown Court and sentencing was at the Old Bailey.

[edinguy]

Does anyone know ow Kermit is getting on, he has been in my thoughts lately.