Latest news with #ChildrenandYoungPersonsAct1933
Daily Record
24-07-2025
- Automotive
- Daily Record
Anyone with kids given 'jail and fines' warning this summer
Kids could find themselves in serious or fatal situations, and parents cannot claim 'just a few minutes' as an excuse Parents are warned to think twice before leaving their children unattended in cars, even if it's 'just for a few minutes'. Leaving them in the car during a quick errand may seem convenient, but the consequences can be severe. With schools out for summer, there's an anticipated increase in children being left alone in parked cars, raising serious concerns about child safety and the legal implications for parents and bystanders. The Met Office has previously warned that Britain could experience more heatwaves this summer, and combining high temperatures with unsupervised children could become a deadly combination. Even on a seemingly cool day, the temperature inside a car can skyrocket dangerously high within minutes. Omni estimates that approximately 40 children die each year due to being left in overheated cars, with over half of these victims being under two years old. Parents must understand that children are more prone to heatstroke than adults, as their bodies warm up quicker, exacerbating the risk. If you spot a child left alone in a car, immediately dial 999 if they appear distressed or the situation seems very dangerous. While there's no legally defined age, the NSPCC recommends that children under 12 are rarely mature enough to be left alone for extended periods. Under no circumstances should children under five be left alone in a car, reports the Mirror. Adam Jones, legal expert at HD Claims, said: "Many parents believe it's fine to leave their child in the car while they run into the shop or fill up with petrol. But if that child comes to harm, or if the car is stolen with the child inside, the consequences can be devastating, legally and emotionally. There's no legal time limit that makes it 'safe'. If something goes wrong, you're responsible - and that can lead to serious charges." What does the law say? Whilst the UK doesn't have specific laws banning the act of leaving children alone in vehicles, it becomes a criminal matter if the child is put in danger by doing so. The Children and Young Persons Act 1933 makes it an offence to leave a child without supervision "in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health", which can result in prosecution. The severity of penalties varies massively—from police cautions and unlimited fines to a maximum of 10 years behind bars in cases of extreme neglect. Social services may also intervene, particularly where there are repeated incidents. Parents are advised to use their judgment based on the child's maturity and their actions in specific situations. Even if a child seems fine when you leave them, they could become distressed or try to leave the vehicle. What if I see a child locked in a car on a hot day? Ring 999 immediately if you spot a child trapped alone in a vehicle during warm weather. While making the emergency call, test whether the car doors are secured. If you find an unlocked door, open all vehicle doors to allow air circulation and reduce the temperature inside. Remain on the phone with the emergency operator throughout, explaining your every action, as this will create a record of your involvement. If the doors are locked up, ask the call handler what you should do next. If the child seems to be in immediate danger or appears unresponsive, discoloured, or distressed, your instinct may be to break a window and rescue the child. However, you should be aware that this could be deemed criminal damage and you might have to justify your actions later in court. Ensure you inform the police about your intended actions and the reasons behind them. Record your actions with photos or videos and gather the names and contact details of any witnesses to the incident. If you are advised against breaking a window, attempt to shade the child with a piece of clothing.
Daily Mirror
24-07-2025
- Automotive
- Daily Mirror
Parents warned they risk fines and jail time for 'just a few minutes' this summer
People have been warned about the danger that can happen when children are left unattended Parents are being urged to think twice before leaving their children unsupervised in cars — even for 'just a few minutes'. While it might seem easier to leave them in the car if you've got a quick job to do, the consequences are serious. With school finished for the summer, more children are expected to be left alone in parked vehicles, sparking urgent concern over child safety and the law. The Met Office has previously warned that Britain could face even more heatwaves this summer, and pairing extreme temperatures with unattended children could spell danger. Even on a mild day, the temperature inside a car can rise dangerously within minutes. Some statistics estimate that about 40 children die per year due to being left in hot cars, according to Omni, and more than half of them are under two years old. Parents should be aware that children are more susceptible to heatstroke than adults because their bodies heat up faster, making the situation even more serious. If you see a child left alone in a car, dial 999 immediately if they are in distress or the situation appears unsafe. While there's no set age in law, the NSPCC advises that children under 12 are rarely mature enough to be left alone for long periods. Children under five should never be left alone in a car under any circumstances. Adam Jones, legal expert at HD Claims, said: "Many parents believe it's fine to leave their child in the car while they run into the shop or fill up with petrol. But if that child comes to harm, or if the car is stolen with the child inside, the consequences can be devastating, legally and emotionally. There's no legal time limit that makes it 'safe'. If something goes wrong, you're responsible — and that can lead to serious charges." What does the law say? In the UK, there is no specific law that bans leaving a child unattended in a car, but it is an offence if doing so places the child at risk. Under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, leaving a child unsupervised 'in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health' can lead to prosecution. Depending on the severity of the case, parents could risk police warnings, unlimited fines, or up to 10 years in prison in extreme neglect cases. Social services could also get involved, especially if repeated concerns are reported. What if I see a child locked in a car on a hot day? Call 999 immediately if you see a child alone in a car on a hot day. As you make the call, check the car doors to see if they are unlocked. If a door is unlocked, open all of the car doors to cool off the interior. Stay on the line with the emergency services operator, detailing everything you are doing. If the doors are locked, ask the operator for advice. If the child appears to be in immediate danger or the child appears to be unresponsive, is discoloured, or in some kind of obvious distress, you may instinctively want to smash a window and rescue the child. But you need to be aware that this could be classed as criminal damage and, potentially, you may need to defend your actions in court. Make sure you tell the police what you intend to do and why. Take pictures or videos to document your actions and also get the names and numbers of witnesses to the incident. If you are advised not to break a window, try shading the child with an item of clothing.
Pembrokeshire Herald
07-05-2025
- Pembrokeshire Herald
Parents admit failing to ensure daughter's school attendance
Court adjourns for sentencing and pre-sentence reports TWO parents from Haverfordwest have admitted failing to ensure their young daughter attended school regularly, in a case brought by Pembrokeshire County Council under education law. The mother and father, both aged in their 40s, appeared before Haverfordwest Magistrates' Court on Thursday (May 1), where they each pleaded guilty to the offence. The court heard that between September 2, 2024, and January 24, 2025, they failed without reasonable justification to ensure the attendance of their nine-year-old daughter, who is registered at a local primary school. The prosecution was brought under Section 444(1A) of the Education Act 1996, which deals with aggravated offences relating to school non-attendance where a parent knowingly allows a child to be absent from school without a valid excuse. Magistrates ordered pre-sentence reports to be prepared for both defendants and adjourned sentencing until May 15, 2025, at Haverfordwest Magistrates' Court. The court imposed a reporting restriction under Section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, prohibiting the publication of any material that could identify the child involved. This includes her name, address, school or photograph.
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Yahoo
Why aren't the teenagers who killed Bhim Kohli being named?
A 15-year-old boy and 13-year-old girl have been found guilty at Leicester Crown Court of the manslaughter of 80-year-old Bhim Kohli following an attack in a park near Leicester in September. The elderly dog walker was racially abused and brutally attacked in Franklin Park in Braunstone Town, just yards away from his home, before dying in hospital the following day. Standing in the dock at Leicester Crown Court today, the teenagers appeared upset when the foreman of the jury returned the guilty verdicts. Judge Mr Justice Turner adjourned the pair's sentencing until 20 May. After the jury reached its unanimous verdicts following six hours and 46 minutes of deliberation, the judge further remanded the 15-year-old boy in custody and granted the 13-year-old female defendant bail. After telling the jury he wanted further background information on the defendants before passing sentence, the judge told the girl: 'I want to make it absolutely crystal clear that the fact that bail is being granted should not be taken as any indication as to the sentence when the time comes.' Currently the two defendants cannot be legally named because of their age. Mr Justice Turner said he will consider a media application to lift reporting restrictions on 19 May, but it is not clear if this relates to naming the two teenagers publicly. Section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act (YJCEA) 1999 gives a Crown or adult magistrates' court the power to make a reporting restriction order for any child before them – including defendants. Automatic reporting restrictions apply to any child concerned in youth court proceedings, under Section 49 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933. While the Children and Young Persons Act states that unless there is a statutory requirement or compelling reason, cases involving children should be heard in the youth court, there are some exceptions. Government guidance says that for "serious crimes, like murder or rape, the case starts in the youth court but will be passed to a Crown Court". If this happens, as was the case for Bhim Kohli's killers, a Crown Court would have to impose a discretionary restriction under Section 45 of the YJCEA to protect a child defendant's identity. Even before court proceedings have begun, media organisations usually avoid identifying any child who has been arrested on suspicion of a crime. This is partly for ethical reasons, and also because it could later lead to court proceedings where reporting restrictions are activated. Press regulator IPSO says editors should 'generally avoid naming children under the age of 18 after arrest for a criminal offence but before they appear in a youth court unless they can show that the individual's name is already in the public domain, or that the individual (or, if they are under 16, a custodial parent or similarly responsible adult) has given their consent'. "This does not restrict the right to name juveniles who appear in a crown court, or whose anonymity is lifted," the guidance adds. Section 45 of the YJCEA allows courts to lift restrictions on identifying child defendants for the following reasons: The effect of the restrictions imposes a "substantial and unreasonable restriction on the reporting of the proceedings". It is in the public interest to remove or relax that restriction. "Prior to conviction the welfare of the child or young person is likely to take precedence over the public interest," the Crown Prosecution Service says. "After conviction, the age of the defendant and the seriousness of the crime of which they have been convicted will be particularly relevant." The bar for public interest in naming child defendants is fairly high, as shown by guidance from the cases of McKerry v Teesdale and Wear Justices (2000) and Damien Pearl v Kings Lynn Justices (2005). In these cases, the public interest was in public protection, but was served by a partial lifting of reporting restrictions: permitting publication of names but not photographs, addresses or schools. In McKerry the court held: "It would be wholly wrong for any court to dispense with a juvenile's prima facie right to anonymity as an additional punishment. "It is also very difficult to see any place for 'naming and shaming'. The... criterion that it is in the public interest to dispense with the reporting restriction must be satisfied." Bhim Kohli was walking his dog through Franklin Park in Braunstone Town, Leicestershire, on the evening of Sunday, 1 September when he became the victim of a "serious assault", police said at the time. Jurors were told Kohli suffered a broken neck and rib fractures which were consistent with 'something heavy striking the rib cage' and died in hospital the next evening. The boy, who denied inflicting the fatal injuries, told a friend he would go 'on the run' to Hinckley, in Leicestershire, the day after the attack but was arrested by police minutes later while hiding in a bush, the court heard. In a letter written two months after the attack, the court heard the boy said 'I did it and I accept I'm doing time' and 'I kinda just needed anger etc releasing'. The boy told the jury he walked over to Kohli that evening, wearing a balaclava, because the girl told the group of five children that he 'carries a knife', before the man fell to his knees during a 'tussle' over the youth's slider. The court was shown a video clip filmed by the girl of the masked boy slapping Kohli in the face with his shoe, which he told the jury he did out of 'instinct'. In another clip taken by the girl, who was alleged to be laughing in one of the videos, Kohli could be seen lying motionless on his side in the park. The jury heard that when the victim was found injured in the park, he told his daughter that he had been called a 'P***' during the attack. Five children – a boy and a girl aged 14 and one boy and two girls aged 12 – were arrested on suspicion of murder shortly after the attack, but four were released without further action. At the time, Kohli's family said in a statement: 'Our hearts have been completely broken. He really was such a loving, caring person whose life was centred around his family. "Bhim was a loving husband, dad and grandad. He was also a son, brother and uncle. He adored his grandkids with all his heart and loved spending time with them. "He really was such a loving, caring person whose life was centred around his family. He has always been a very hardworking man and even at the age of 80 he was still very active. 'One of his great passions was his allotment, he would go every day to tend to his plots and was so proud of them. He also enjoyed walking the family dog Rocky on the park many times a day. 'Bhim loved to laugh. He was always very happy and talkative, the joker of the family and always loved to outsmart us with a smile." Read more Will killers be forced to face victims' families in court during sentencing? (Yahoo News) MoJ responds after reports Southport killer Axel Rudakubana was beaten up in Strangeways prison (Manchester Evening News) Why Axel Rudakubana did not receive a whole-life order (Yahoo News) Click below to see the latest East Midlands headlines
