I want to be this spry at 60

[The Hunter of Jahanna]

Court refuses trial by combat By David Sapsted (Filed: 16/12/2002) A court has rejected a 60-year-old man's attempt to invoke the ancient right to trial by combat, rather than pay a £25 fine for a minor motoring offence. Leon Humphreys remained adamant yesterday that his right to fight a champion nominated by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) was still valid under European human rights legislation. He said it would have been a "reasonable" way to settle the matter. Magistrates sitting at Bury St Edmunds on Friday had disagreed and instead of accepting his offer to take on a clerk from Swansea with "samurai swords, Ghurka knives or heavy hammers", fined him £200 with £100 costs. Humphreys, an unemployed mechanic, was taken to court after refusing to pay the original £25 fixed penalty for failing to notify the DVLA that his Suzuki motorcycle was off the road. After entering a not guilty plea, he threw down his unconventional challenge. Humphreys, from Bury St Edmunds, said: "I was willing to fight a champion put up by the DVLA, but it would have been a fight to the death."

I dont know what is worse? The fact that in Europe there is legislation that allows for "trial by combat" filed under "Human rights",or that they fined this guy more for trying to use it, OR that a 60 yr old thinks a combat to the death is a viable option to resolve a $25 fine.

Trial by combat is a great idea, but it shouldt be filed under a human rights heading. Maybe file under the same group of laws that allows one to represnent themself in court even though they arent a lawyer. The article says that the man was entitled to fight the "champion nominated by the DVLA". Who is to say that the DVLA cant nominate a certified bad ass like Jet Li or Lennox Lewis to be its champion? No One said it had to be easy.

I also dont think that they should have fined him more for trying to use the law in this situation. They could have just told him "NO", like the court acctualy did and just let him pay his fine.The extra fines seem like a penalty for knowing the law and being creative in trying to use it. I just hope at 60 I feel confident enough in my own abilities to even consider at fight to the death.

[Borvik]

When I'm sixty I hope my wife will lock me up in the storeroom as soon as I begin to react like that. I really wouldn't want to read something like this about me in the newspapers!!!

[Grungi]

you misread i think, there isnt legislation for trial by combat its legislation for a "reasonable" way to settle the matter, the 60 yr old was trying to intepret that legislation to invoke trial by combat, which is obviously not supported in european community legislation, he was just trying to argue that it is "reasonable" to want to hack someone up with a samuri sword, i can see his argument

it all sounds quite humourous to me, was he really really serious about trying to have a fight to the death? i wonder if he said it with a twinkle in his eye.

the human rights legislation probably says that they have to settle it in any "reasonable" manner, of course it doesnt say trial by combat, man what must you think of europeans!

whole thing sounds like a bit of a wind up cos the european courts are reknowned for being pretty useless but also for overturning statements made by other countries courts, therefore he might have thought there was a chance of them saying its not worth it over 25 quid (no chance but worth a try)

heh trial by combat indeed [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Harkoliar]

i find it funny and not serious... if you ask me

[Bardan the Slayer]

More likely that trial by combat is simply a "right" from 1000 years ago or so that was never taken off the books or revoked. It happens.

[Grungi]

nooooooo EUROPEAN LAW, european community has only been around this century, european law has only really been in any kind of powerful effect in last 30 or so years, there are individual country or even town bylaws which date back hundreds of years, but european law cant [img]tongue.gif[/img] so no its not, its just some guy trying to take the mike out of the system.

[WillowIX]

LLAO! Trial by combat? Against a clerk? However did he come up with that? Why did he receive additional fines? In contempt of court?

[Cloudbringer]

It sounds like an ancient 'law' he's trying to invoke not a modern one. The extra fines certainly covered court fees and most likely were made to discourage others from wasting the court's time like that. As for him wanting that trial by combat...well, not everyone has a firm grasp of reality, I guess!

[Heartless Butterscotch]

I wonder if that guy was actually Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer. Because that sounds like something he would come up with.

[Grungi]

gah there is no ancient european law, by definition the european courts of justice arent ancient, its a relatively new thing, there is NO ancient law cos the laws are new, 1000 years ago there was no european court of law, it was feuding countries and states right up until the 1st world war before we even had a semblance of a european united front, therefore logic dictates that there cannot be an ancient european law of any description....

pretty infallible logic if you ask me, normally id listen to other p.o.v but in this its static. It said in european law, and thats what its talking about, and european law is a recent thing. So unless someone seriously thinks that 30 years ago trial by combat would be considered as a viable european law thats the only way it can be true.