Here are 22 paragraphs as Reasons for Decision by Mr Justice Wyn Williams
- to refuse the application for Habeas Corpus
- to refuse an application for bail
- to decline to consider an application to purge his contempt.
4: I accept that the Claimant had little time to respond to the documentation provided on behalf of the Secretary of State of Justice.
11: I am unpersuaded that I should find that the Claimant’s rights under Article 6 of the Convention were breached by the procedure which was adopted at the Crown Court.
13: Habeas Corpus is not the appropriate remedy to get the medication that Norman needs. If formal complaints don’t succeed, he might consider a ‘judicial review’.
15: There is simply no proper evidence regarding the Claimant’s ill health…
Conclusion on habeas corpus
19. … his interests are much better served by an appeal to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division.
21. Judge Rose is in a better position to judge the seriousness of the contempt and the genuineness of the Claimant’s application to purge his contempt. It is a possible outcome of the appeal that the court will uphold the finding of contempt and also determine that a sentence of six months’ imprisonment was an appropriate one. Even in those circumstances, however, the court might be prepared to entertain an application to purge the contempt.
22. … bail pending appeal is rarely granted…
I guess Norman / Chris Jarvis can’t win the legal arguments. Appealing on compassionate grounds may be the only avenue.
Will the judge in the Appeal Court have a heart that can feel compassion??? Can we speak to it with our petition comments?
- An Open Letter re Norman Scarth and Thursday’s hearing to Free him from Leeds Prison (victims-unite.net)
- What’s the point complaining? Norman Scarth hits more than four prison walls (victims-unite.net)