Can one still run for parliament after serving time for manslaughter?
916227
I agree. Even if the country was willing to help ex-convicts, and wish to show it by allowing an ex-convict to run for parliament, that person would most probably be given least priority. They don't have to show it.
843963
Nope, murder sanctioned by the government and police always goes unpunished... unless it's to boost political support, in which case they get made into sacrifices for public approval.
726392
Yes. Under the enhanced disclousure procedures any potential employer will get a police record search which will show any convictions, charges, cautions or suspisions. It would then be up to an employer if they wished to employ you. They are likely to ask the nature of the offecece, when it was and the background. Given it is a serious crime of violence they are likely to ask you about this before offering any employment as they have to be sure you are able and fit to work with children
1007684
joining the service may help if it's not too serious (my exp.). And I believe you could petition the judge, again on the severity of the crime, and usually it would probably be your first, and last brainless crime.
389495
They can go all the way back. certain crimes have no statute of limitations e.g. murder. and when it comes to the governments money, they won't write it off.
513900
No. he can't. If he had been with the DMK in the recent assembly election, he would have got the sympathy of DMK cadres. Now he is enjoying only the hatred because of his betrayal. Even he has lost his credibility among the general public.
596632
i think that that can only happen when you've been a police man for a bit atleast unless you check vacancys and then apply there directly and then move there. i think.
848423
I discovered this useful information for your friend on http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/runciman/pf6.htm.  In summary, there is no rehabilitation period for cautions because not being criminal convictions, they fall outside the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.  It looks as though this position is being addressed and that your friend may have no cause for fear as far as her caution as a minor is concerned.\n\n"A caution is not a criminal conviction but it may be cited in court as part of the defendant's criminal record. This should be explained to the offender when the caution is administered. Information about cautions may also be given in criminal record certificates, but not criminal conviction certificates, issued under Part V of the Police Act 1997. Under section 112 of this Act, the Secretary of State must issue a criminal conviction certificate to any individual who applies for one and pays a prescribed fee. The certificate gives the details of the criminal convictions of the applicant, unless they are spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. Cautions should not be included since the certificate is confined to convictions. Such a certificate is likely to be needed by people whose potential employers make it a condition of employment that the applicant proves that he has no criminal record. \n\nFor certain appointments, the Secretary of State must issue criminal record certificates under sections 113 or 114 or enhanced criminal record certificates under sections 115 or 116 of the Police Act 1997. Examples of people who may be required to produce such certificates are those whose duties involve regular contact with children, those who need to be checked in the interests of national security, people involved in the administration of the law, people in the medical professions, people seeking appointments under the Crown and senior managers in banking and financial services. A certificate issued under section 113 may include convictions that are spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and cautions. Certificates issued under sections 114-116 may in addition contain information held on police records that does not relate to convictions or cautions at all, for example acquittals, decisions not to prosecute, continuing police operations, and known associates of the applicant. \n\nThere is no provision in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 for a caution to be treated as spent. Thus a caution may remain in force after a conviction for an equivalent or more serious offence has become spent. The Government has recently issued a consultation paper proposing that the law should be changed so that a caution becomes spent immediately with the result that there should be no rehabilitation period for the purposes of the Act. We support this. It would mean that the recipients of a caution need not refer to it when asked, for example by a prospective employer, whether they have a criminal or police record. The caution could still, however, be cited in court during any criminal proceedings."
727003
Humm... are you the burglar?  Did they finally catch up with you?  I doubt if the commission of a crime has ANY statute of limitations and even if they find you 20 years later you are still hooked.  A number of criminal cases have been solved decades after they were committed and the perpetrator got hauled off to jail.  The BTK killer was one recent example.
75404
Not that it matters because he can't ever run again but NO.  Frankly, I don't think we should stick with one guy or one party for too long.  It's a bad idea.  If we change things up, we make sure that in the long run, every thing balances out and we don't become a country ruled by only one ideology.  No one has time to grab enough control to make everyone else miserable for the rest of eternity! :)
645567
This area of law is very complex and the following is only basic guidance. The law states that,\n\nAny person can arrest a person who is in the act of committing an indictable offence or \nAnyone whom he reasonably suspects to be committing such an offence, if \nit is not reasonably practicable for a constable to make the arrest instead and\nit is necessary to arrest the person for one of the below reasons,\nTo prevent the person in question,\n\ncausing physical injury to himself or any other person; \nsuffering physical injury; \ncausing loss of or damage to property; or \nmaking off before a constable can assume responsibility for him. \nThere a  few points to raise about the above paragraph.\n\nWhat is an indictable offence? \nHow do I know if I can make a citizens arrest? \n1. An indictable offence is an offence that can be tried at Crown Court. Below are examples of indictable offences which are the most likely to be encountered by members of the public,\n\ntheft \nburglary \ncriminal damage. \n2. You can make an arrest if the suspect is actually committing the offence or if you reasonably suspect them of committing it, or when the offence has been committed and you reasonably suspect them of having committed it. \n\nThere is no specific wording to use when making a citizens arrest. However you must inform the person you are arresting as soon as possible what you are doing, why you are doing it and what offence you believe the person has committed.\n\nThere are other considerations to make when making an arrest,\n\nreasonable force - see question in related information for details on reasonable force.\n\npotential for civil litigation - The courts are sympathetic to public spirited citizens and the exercise of their powers and rights. However, if you get it wrong you could be sued for unlawful arrest and/or false imprisonment. \nDo not make a citizens arrest if you feel that you would be putting yourself or any other person in danger, ring 999
826458
nothing, our system of law says that a person cannot be tried twice for the same case, double jeopardy or autrefois acquit (French for 'previously acquitted'), so even though he confessed he would have to be charged on another offense. He could be jailed for perjury, a serious offense but not on murder charges.
699424
A wise and experienced judge weighs both justice and circumstances.  The purposes of imprisonment in this case would be to ensure the crime is not committed again (done, by virtue of his being too ill to drive ever again) and to ensure that he is made to pay a price for what he did (done, by probation).\n\nIf an 89-year-old man went outside with a shotgun and purposely murdered people, that would be different and I believe handled differently by a judge.  This was, for the most part, an accident.  I agree that there is no reason to spend taxpayer money to imprison a very ill man when he will surely never drive again and is experiencing punishment that probably goes beyond what prison could inflict upon him anyway.
88155
It depends on the State and what type of crime you were a victim of.  For example - if you were  victim of sexual assault - you may have more time - but if it was a simple assault - you may only have one year.  In your example above - they most likely have a year - but a prosecuter is going to wonder why if they wait long to report it.  May only have a civil case after too long
161069
Expunged: Go to a Lawyer and ask him if you qualify. Some offences you can not have it done.
131347
Umm... because we voted for them? Personally, I'd like two elected houses, and Single Transferable Vote rather than First Past The Post. However, I'm proud of my MP, who has taken action, for example. against the proposed 90 day detention without trial.
717582
Of course they can. It really depends on the quality of the police and the work they do. In some states I believe you can file your own charges. Mass is one I think. You still get due process.\n\nNothing to do with your situation as I don't know a thing about it, but don't most in jail say they are innocent?\n\nThere is also a DVD out currently which has the stories of 8 or 9..maybe more, that were on death row awaiting execution when they found they were innocent. I think several who have been executed have now been cleared of the charges they were put to death for. That is why many states won't allow a death penalty. My state has one, but only for contract slayings and the murder of a police officer. None are on death row and none have been executed since the law went back on the books.