What I am looking at is the balance between rights of the individual and rights of the nation. If you issue civil process in the courts you get a form. And there is a question all to itself are there any issues under Human Rights Act involved. I am thinking that is absurdly unbalanced. What about the rights of AND THE DUTIES TO the nation ? As I see it the law imposes duties to report knowledge and makes failure to do so an offence. Misprision of Treason, Proceeds of Crime Money Laundering and Terrorism Act 2000. Plus the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 tries to get folks like councillors talking to each other about crime. But there isn't a section in the Claim forms for civil process that asks specifically are there any duties to report within the case ? One case I have in mind is a libel case against a tory cllr. He called a witness who was a member of the police authority. he appears to have told the court "There is no process of inquiry concerning the defendant". But what would have happened if the Judge asked "Have you any knowledge that the law makes obligatory for you to report" The police authority member knew that the defendant had been arrested for paramilitary activity in TA 1987. He knew that his police authority had called on Chief constable for inquiry into the defendants mate's role as a Reliance Security Guard at Deal barracks 1989. He knew that the Police Authority had called for inquiry into a mate of the defendant in connection with sabotage of backup generator systems. He knew that the paramilitary training arrests had occurred on land owned by his fellow tory cllr witness. He knew that just two weeks before the hearing there had been a serious nuclear leak incident due to failure of backup power at Dounreay and that had added importance to the call for inquiry into the defendant's mate called for by his police authority. The judge with that evidence would query why is Chief constable not conducting a process of inquiry I assume this is Kent again summons Chief constable. On money laundering duties to report. Same thing. The father of a murder victim issued proceedings against Chief constable concerning failure to forensically test a damaged Rolex seized by police at the murder scene. If the process had a question are there any duties to report knowledge of proceeds of crime ? it doesn't so to paraphrase how it went in court But in Court the Chief constable's co-defendant said of the Rolex (usually worn by the murder victim) " If police had queried it he would have said it belongs to his father. Because his official income couldn;t explain him owning a Rolex" Then about the couple. who had 3 children, and the records of voters lists "I was never financially reliant on him although we had 3 children and he took them to and from school and we ate together as a family every night and we holidayed together. I was always a single mother claiming benefits for living on one or another of my father;s buy to let houses" And on the failure to wind up a scaffolding firm owned by the murder victim "Yes I sold the lorries and scaffolding to pay for the funeral" On how a half million gross value estate was valued nil net for tax and probate but even at a time of shrinking house values ended up with value to disburse to beneficiary after the inquest. "I relied on someone else to do the estate accounts but he aint got the records" On the fact that assets of a company struck off by companies house are property of the Crown "But I had to flog em to help pay for the funeral" So in effect the Judge said "Well he woulda said the Rolex was his dad's because he had to disguise his illegal income. So of course the watch was his. We will ignore that its beneficial value would be to creditors of a nil net value estate and give it to the Chief constables co defendant and we won't embarrass Chief constable by asking why there was no proceeds of crime inquiry concerning the true value of the estate" We pay barristers and Judges a heap of money to be, as far as the interests of the nation as defined by duty to report law, as much use as tits on a bull. It is all very well the law placing duties to report to a constable. But we need a closed loop checking system through judiciary. Otherwise we end up relying solely on police and I rest my case by saying Kent Police. 11 dead Royal Marines and a bunch of backup generator failures including fatal incidents and a police concerned only with avoiding recording crime complaints, ignoring statutory reports and avoiding work. And avoiding their own arses being in the sling. If you look at this new defamation law. Prior test of whether serious harm was caused to the plaintiff. We should Add to it whether there was any compromise of duty to report law. IE Whether harm was done to all. IE Whether the libel complained of was a denial of a duty to report ? I have got a case in mind.