Juridicalblog.net

I used to be a keen amateur photographer when I was a teenager and during my 20s. My father had an old camera, later he bought a new one. He also bought developing devices, so I used to make black and white photographs at home.
Later in my 30s. I used a camera only during my holiday and I started to buy colored films, which I wasn’t able to develop at home. It was necessary to send them to the lab.
In 1994 I bought my first camcorder and I was thrilled from it. Its zoom was excellent, I could record even remote objects well. It was amazing, that I was able to record objects in motion and to replay them on my TV monitor.
At that time I completely ceased using a camera and I thought that everyone would do the same and that the production of cameras would finish.
At first I was right, because most of my relatives, friends and people, who I knew, bought a camcorder. But later cameras with a zoom and with a possibility of recording video sequences were invented. They were quite cheap. It was clear that cameras like that, produced on a digital base, had most of the advantages that only camcorders had offered so far.
I’d say, that people buy cameras more than camcorders these days.
Maybe camcorders alone will cease and will be completely replaced with cameras in spite of the fact that nowadays digital camcorders enables taking pictures too.
It’s also possible that mobile phones in a short future will enable not only calling and taking pictures, but shooting objects in motion too.

Along the School Act, children have to attend school and their parents have to send them there. The compulsory school attendance starts to children, who aren’t disqualified on the health grounds, at the age of 6 and lasts for 9 years.
Unfortunately, there’re still parents, who don’t care at their children’s school attendance, who aren’t interested in children’s school results and disregarded urgences from teachers to fulfil their duties. Such parents don’t mind, that their children stay at home instead of going to school regularly.
Children, who don’t go to school and stay at home, live so called the idling way of life.
Along the Criminal Code, parents, who enable, that their children live idling way of life, commit a crime called the Thread of education of youth. Such parents can be sent to prison for the period from 6 months to 5 years.
The last case like this, which I supervised, occured during the school year 2003-2004 in one of elementary schools. Three siblings aged 13, 12 and 9 years ceased attending school, so their teachers summoned their parents to visit the school, what they didn’t accepted. This teachers then visited parents in their flat and tried unsuccessfully to persuade them to sent children to school again, so after that they informed local social institution about the behaviour of children and their parents. Precautions imposed on them failed, because nothing was changed, so this institution announced the case to the police as a suspicion of a crime.
At first a policeman from a local police station questioned parents and they pleaded not guilty, so after an interviewing the teachers, the case was handed to the regional police, whose investigator accused both parents from a crime and after a short investigation prosecutor filed a prosecution to the regional court.
I took part in the trial, which lasted about 3 hours. Accused people pleaded not guilty even in front of the court, but the case was clear. The teachers’ testimony were convincing and the school documents, that were read during the trial, were also accepted as a convincing evidence.
Both parents were imposed conditional imprisonment for 18 months with probation for 3 years. They accepted punishment without hesitation and didn’t appeal against it.
It was clear, that they plead not quilty, because they were afraid of imprisonment without probation.
During the criminal proceedings it was also found out, that the whole family lived in a very poor living conditions in a flat, consisted of a kitchen and one room. The bahthroom and WC were outside the flat. They were disconnected by an electricity because they didn’t pay for its using. Both parents were unimployed, they didn’t have any education except of a remedial school. They didn’t have a chance to get a job, because they weren’t able to do any work, only simple activities, but their working moral wasn’t high. They didn’t try to get a job. They lived off welfare they regularly received from a local social authority.
I must add that simultaneously with this criminal proceedings, the civil action was held in order to take the children away from their parents and give them into educational institute, because their parents weren’t able and willing to educate them properly.

Before the Velvet revolution in 1989 and a few years after it, the standard of living in my country wasn’t very high. For example not every family had a car. Young people, especially men used to dream of driving, but they were mostly without a car, so some of them satisfied their desire for driving in an inappropriate way and used to steal cars to joyride.
Along the Penal Code, joyriding is a crime called Unauthorized usage of somebody else’s motor vehicle, so in that period I sent lots of joyriders to the court.
People, who steal a car in order to joyride, are mostly drunk, because they usually commit such crime during the night on their way home from a pub, but nevertheless they drive too fast, so they often cause a car accident.
In the late 90s. last century, the standard of living quickly improved, so even young people were able to buy at least a second-hand car.
This is probable the main reason, why the number of joyriders has fallen since, so such cases are rare nowadays.
The last case of joyriding, which investigation I supervised and which was slightly different, occured this summer. 18 years old student, without a driving licence, took, without any permission, keys of his parents’ car, opened the door, started the engine and set off for a joyride. In spite of the fact, that he can’t drive a car safely, he went very fast, so after a short ride he wasn’t able to go through a sharp left turn and got himself with a car out of the road, where he crashed into a tree next to the road and seriously damaged the car.
Fortunately for him, he was sober.
A policeman from a local police station started investigation of the accident in summarily preparatory proceedings, but the joyrider wasn’t accused, because his parents, as the owners of a damaged car, made use of their right and refused to give consent to the investigation against him, so it wasn’t possible to bring him to trial and the case had to be closed forever.

In my country court may only impose punishments, which are mentioned in the Penal Code.
Among the most frequent punishments belong imprisonment, imprisonment with conditionally granted a stay of execution, pecuniary punishment, compelled community service and prohibition of professional activity.
Less frequent punishments are - deprivation of titles of honours and awards, deprivation of military rank, forfeiture of a thing, forfeiture of property, banishment, and prohibition of abode.
There’s also an exceptional punishments - imprisonment for the term between 15 and 25 years and the life penalty.
The death penalty was abolished after the velvet revolution in 1989.
As you can see the Penal Code doesn’t allow to impose an unusual kind of punishment - shaming, so I don’t know exactly what it is.
I’d say shaming is something like a pillory in middle ages. It was a special device placed in public, which clamped hands and legs of perpetrator, who wasn’t able to move. Everyone from the crowd, surrounded the perpetrator knew what crime the perpetrator commited. People used to throw stones, carcasses or excrements at perpetrator so such person was often injured, sometimes happened that perpetrator during pillory died.
I don’t think pillory could be used nowadays.
Shaming reminds me an event from my childhood, that I still remember and that happened in the block of flats, where I lived with my parents. On the ground floor of the building there was a supermarket. A young female shoplifter used to come into the supermarket and used to steal goods from there. She was repeatedly caught by the staff. Management of the supermarket didn’t call police and in the end decided to use so called self-help. It made a photo of that woman and displayed it in the shopwindow, so everyone, who entered the supermarket could see, that this woman, who lived in the same street was a shoplifter. It was really effective. She stopped stealing. It was a shaming imposed by supermarket.
I don’t know another example like this.
I think, if impose by the court, shaming like this would be a convenient and indeed effective punishment.
I also thing that threat of that kind of shaming, would keep shoplifters from stealing.
Shaming, imposed by court on the base of the Penal Code, would also be an effective threat against those, who commit many other misdemeanours and crimes, so shaming should be put among punishments in the Penal Code and the Offensive Code.

I’m used to live in the country, which doesn’t lie by the sea. During my everyday life I don’t miss it.
But this fact is the reason why I regularly spend my abroad holiday somewhere nearby the coast.
Relaxing on the beach and swimming in the sea, I always realize advantages which have countries completely or partly surrounded by the sea.
Littoral countries make use of their position. Presence of the sea influences economy of such country, which profits of fishing, tourism, sea transport, etc. Lots of people are employed or make bussiness in branches connected with the sea.
I’m sure that my country would be much more developed and richer having sea.
So I must envy to those who live in the seaside countries.