Chrisy Morris - Parking Tickets and Bailiffs.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

The jury is out.
Verdict is in.

I'm on tenterhooks!

[Penny Wise]

GUILTY !!!

https://www.maldonandburnhamstandard.co ... urt-order/

A jury unanimously found Morris guilty of the earlier offence but cleared him of the second charge.

Judge Timothy Walker adjourned sentencing until February 28 for reports.

[SoLongCeylon]

What would the sentence be? Suspended prison??

Shame he got off the window smashing charge. Probably not enough beyond reasonable doubt evidence ( which he will see as a "win" )

Will his conviction mean his days as an annoying disruptive petty minded chocolate teapot of a local councillor are over?

[Penny Wise]

What would the sentence be? Suspended prison??

Shame he got off the window smashing charge. Probably not enough beyond reasonable doubt evidence ( which he will see as a "win" )

Will his conviction mean his days as an annoying disruptive petty minded chocolate teapot of a local councillor are over?

https://unlock.org.uk/advice/councillor ... 20election.

You can’t be a councillor if you:

Have been sentenced to prison for 3 months or more (including suspended sentences) during the last five years

If you are already a local councillor and receive a three month custodial sentence or more (including suspended sentences) you will automatically lose your seat

[John Uskglass]

GUILTY !!!

But only on one count, and not with regard to the arguably more serious allegation. As I understand it, he will only be disqualified as a councillor if sentenced to three months or more in chokey.

These seem to be the applicable sentencing guidelines.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/o ... on-orders/

[AnOwlCalledSage]

GUILTY !!!

But only on one count, and not with regard to the arguably more serious allegation. As I understand it, he will only be disqualified as a councillor if sentenced to three months or more in chokey.

These seem to be the applicable sentencing guidelines.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/o ... on-orders/

It doesn't matter if it's suspended. No actual chokey is needed.

Normally courts take a dim view of breaching their orders. If he is sensible he would throw himself at the mercy of the court pleading that a suspended sentence would affect his role as a councillor. However, I don't think the gobshite will be able to do that.

[longdog]

Shame he got off the window smashing charge. Probably not enough beyond reasonable doubt evidence ( which he will see as a "win" )

He had a pretty good alibi to be honest. Even if the prosecution's allegation that they were lying to protect a friend is true it's still a good one.

But Morris claimed he had spent the whole night at Langdon's Mill House Hotel, where he was living at the time.

He said he was chatting to hotel boss Richard Perry, while the Christmas decorations were being taken down.

Mr Perry denied he had been asked to provide an alibi, and partner Carey Martin said it would have been impossible for Morris to have slipped out.

[SpearGrass]

Looks like a B2 on the sentencing guideline (yes it is the right one). Starting point is 12 weeks imprisonment. Range goes down to a medium level community sentence and up to 12 months.

The breach of the restraining order is the more serious offence. A criminal damage conviction would have aggravated it, but had he been convicted of it the two sentences would have been concurrent, as the one was committed in the course of the other.

I don't see much mitigation and I seem to recall he has previous and has been to prison before. So it isn't looking good.

Calling sentences is a mug's game, but if I were representing him I'd advise him to expect a custodial sentence. A suspended sentence is seldom indicated for someone with a record for breach, or a long criminal record, because there can be little hope of compliance. His best bet would be a high level community order. There's no credit for a guilty plea to take it down, and remorse is rather difficult to run convincingly when you were accusing the victim of being a liar last month. I think I would bet a few Res on a custodial sentence.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I think I would bet a few Res on a custodial sentence.

He could still keep his councillor role, even if committed, if it's less than 3 months. Presumably 12 weeks is less than 3 months for the purposes of the legislation and it wouldn't lead to disqualification for not attending meetings, as that is 6 months of non-attendance.

[He Who Knows]

His alibi Richard Perry is his BNP councillor mate, remember him? (see photo of them campaigning on p17 of this thread).
Not that great an alibi when it's one of your best mates.

[He Who Knows]

Further research on the Mill House Hotel bed and breakfast owned by Chrisy's alibis, Richard Perry and Carey Martin shows that it's been a base for the BNP and EDL since 2015. https://essexantifa.wordpress.com/2015/ ... use-hotel/ Chrisy and Richard went on to campaign as BNP councillors in 2016.
It was also the scene of Chrisy's latest scuffle in November with the council leader's husband who received a black eye. Richard Perry can be seen in the background saying "It's my home, calm down fella".
Richard Perry is a long time friend and colleague of Chrisy. Not a credible alibi.

[longdog]

I am indebted to m'learned friend for the background of which I was not aware.

I withdraw my "good alibi" and substitute an "apparently good enough for the jury".

[He Who Knows]

It's not over as Chrisy has said he'll appeal. He got off on appeal at Manchester Crown Court in April 2018 because Judge Lawton believed his nonsense. It would be tragic if he wriggled out of this one on the basis of crap alibis Richard Perry & Carey Martin.

[John Uskglass]

Quatloos name checked in the comments on this report of the case.

https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-n ... sy-6561271

It would be tragic if he wriggled out of this one on the basis of crap alibis Richard Perry & Carey Martin.

AIUI he was acquitted on one charge because of the alibi from his fellow neo-fascist, but the one he was convicted of involved a separate defence.

[TheRambler]

It's not over as Chrisy has said he'll appeal.

They are always “going to appeal” or in some way or other refusing to accept the verdict. I know of one FMOTL who was convicted 5 years ago and is still “fighting it”. The fact that he spent longer on remand for failing to appear than would have been the case if he had appeared or even bothered to leave his cell when the case was finally heard has passed him by completely.

His solicitor had advised him to plead guilty, but what does a solicitor know about the law? He did the obvious thing, dispensed with the solicitor and conducted his own non defence by refusing to appear. Following this successful strategy he is employing it once more for his interminable (non) appeal.

The mindset is easily summed up

TheRambler

[aesmith]

It's not over as Chrisy has said he'll appeal. He got off on appeal at Manchester Crown Court in April 2018 because Judge Lawton believed his nonsense.

That was an appeal from a Magistrate's Court conviction, where you have the automatic right to appeal to the Crown Court, at which point the case is heard from scratch. Appealing from a more serious conviction at the Crown Court will need some actual grounds.

[John Uskglass]

Assuming he gets a sentence severe enough to disqualify him as a councillor, and submits an appeal, would he stay in office until the appeal is heard?

[TheRambler]

Assuming he gets a sentence severe enough to disqualify him as a councillor, and submits an appeal, would he stay in office until the appeal is heard?

Well, the current criteria are as follows:

Under section 80 of the Local Government Act 1972, a person is disqualified from
standing as a candidate or being a member of a local authority, if they:

• have, within 5 years before being elected, or at any time since being elected,
been convicted in the UK, Channel Islands or Isle of Man of any offence and
have received a sentence of imprisonment (suspended or not) for a period of
not less than three months without the option of a fine;

That seems pretty unequivocal. Any appeal against conviction and or sentence would have to have substantive grounds; i.e be properly arguable; before leave to appeal is granted. The application for leave needs to be lodged within 28 days. So Chrisy's clock is ticking already. He can't go for a re-match just because he didn't like the outcome. I would expect the local authority to go ahead, prepare the disqualification papers and execute them when the process is complete.

The only situation I'm aware of where a conviction that results in a disqualification is not immediately applied is in relation to S21 of the Firearms Act:

the sentence is suspended under section 189 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 [F16or section 264 or 277 of the Sentencing Code],

the person shall not have a firearm or ammunition in his possession at any time during the period of five years beginning with the second day after the date on which the sentence is passed.

This allows the convicted person to relinquish any firerams in their possession and thus avoid committing a further offence.

TheRambler

[SpearGrass]

Under s. 80(5) of the Act the disqualification comes into effect when the time for an appeal has expired (i.e. 28 days from the date of conviction) or, if an appeal is lodged, the date the appeal is concluded. So it's at least 28 days from this week, and longer if he lodges an appeal.

(5) For the purposes of subsection (1). (d) above, the ordinary date on which the period allowed for making an appeal or application with respect to the conviction expires or, if such an appeal or application is made, the date on which the appeal or application is finally disposed of or abandoned or fails by reason of the non-prosecution thereof shall be deemed to be the date of the conviction

How much longer after that depends on whether his counsel can put up a convincing case on paper. You have to have grounds before you can appeal against a conviction in the Crown Court - a legal error or material irregularity. It first requires the leave of one judge who concludes there is an arguable case.

Judges are supposed to give sober reasons for refusing leave, but I recall one appeal against sentence being rejected by the single judge in one line of (beautiful) hand-written text across the application: "not a day too long" (he was right).

[hucknallred]

Suspended sentence and sacked.
https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-n ... ed-6730506