Mistyeyeddreamer
20-02-04, 11:42 AM
Sorry, I've got no link for this story, I read it in the paper this morning.
A woman accused of attacking her neighbour has won £11,000 damages after claiming her human rights were breached when the council set up a secret video camera.
Mother of four, Janette Martin, 44, was put under surveillance after a string of complaints about insulting, threatening and violent behaviour.
The first she knew of the camera, disguised as a juntion box, was when video footage said to show her son Peter, then 11, vandalising a fence.
Last night neighbours and senior council sources reacted with outrage to the 'ridiculous' pay-out.** One neighbour said: 'It's shocking that someone reported for trouble-making should get money out of it.'
Miss Martin and her children were said to have made life a misery for Neil and Tammy Davies, who own their home next door to her three bedroom council house on the Aspley estate in Nottingham.
Miss Davies, 28 claimed divorcee Miss Martin had grabbed her hair and banged her head on a fence and that ther children threw stones and fired pellets at her home.** Miss Martin, who denied the allegations was warned by the council in July 1999 that she could be evicted.
But further complaints followed from Mrs.Davies, who said eggs had been thrown at her home, excrement smeared on the door handle and bleach poured into a letterbox.
The council then attached the camera to the wall of the Davies house.** It pointed at Miss Martin's front door and the space between their homes.** Filming stopped in 2000 after Miss Martin gave an undertaking in court not to assault or cause a nuisance to the Davieses and not let her children trespass on their land.
Miss Martin's lawyer then advised her that she could bring a case at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, complaining that her rights to 'respect for family life' and privacy had been breached.
Solicitor Terry Oldham said: 'The camera could see into my client's house when the door was open.** At the time the council had no lawful authority to carry out covert surveillence.'** After the court ruled that Mis Martin had a case, the Government agreed to pay her £4,000 damages and £7,050 costs in an out-of-court settlement.
Mr. and Mrs Davies were unavailable for comment last night.** But a senior council source said: 'It's ridiculous.** I don['t think it's at all appropriate for people who have caused problems to be rewarded in this way.** What's really infuriating is that the legislation giving councils the aurthority for such filming came into force just a few months after we did it in this case.'** The Home Office said it could not comment on individual cases.
Miss Martin, who now lives in another area of Nottingham said: 'I was devastated when I found out the camera was up.** I felt like I'd been raped.** I never did anything to the neighbours.** I was a victim.** I never had any problems until Mrs.Davies moved in.** She tried to be a cut above the rest.'
Daily Mail, 20/02/04
A woman accused of attacking her neighbour has won £11,000 damages after claiming her human rights were breached when the council set up a secret video camera.
Mother of four, Janette Martin, 44, was put under surveillance after a string of complaints about insulting, threatening and violent behaviour.
The first she knew of the camera, disguised as a juntion box, was when video footage said to show her son Peter, then 11, vandalising a fence.
Last night neighbours and senior council sources reacted with outrage to the 'ridiculous' pay-out.** One neighbour said: 'It's shocking that someone reported for trouble-making should get money out of it.'
Miss Martin and her children were said to have made life a misery for Neil and Tammy Davies, who own their home next door to her three bedroom council house on the Aspley estate in Nottingham.
Miss Davies, 28 claimed divorcee Miss Martin had grabbed her hair and banged her head on a fence and that ther children threw stones and fired pellets at her home.** Miss Martin, who denied the allegations was warned by the council in July 1999 that she could be evicted.
But further complaints followed from Mrs.Davies, who said eggs had been thrown at her home, excrement smeared on the door handle and bleach poured into a letterbox.
The council then attached the camera to the wall of the Davies house.** It pointed at Miss Martin's front door and the space between their homes.** Filming stopped in 2000 after Miss Martin gave an undertaking in court not to assault or cause a nuisance to the Davieses and not let her children trespass on their land.
Miss Martin's lawyer then advised her that she could bring a case at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, complaining that her rights to 'respect for family life' and privacy had been breached.
Solicitor Terry Oldham said: 'The camera could see into my client's house when the door was open.** At the time the council had no lawful authority to carry out covert surveillence.'** After the court ruled that Mis Martin had a case, the Government agreed to pay her £4,000 damages and £7,050 costs in an out-of-court settlement.
Mr. and Mrs Davies were unavailable for comment last night.** But a senior council source said: 'It's ridiculous.** I don['t think it's at all appropriate for people who have caused problems to be rewarded in this way.** What's really infuriating is that the legislation giving councils the aurthority for such filming came into force just a few months after we did it in this case.'** The Home Office said it could not comment on individual cases.
Miss Martin, who now lives in another area of Nottingham said: 'I was devastated when I found out the camera was up.** I felt like I'd been raped.** I never did anything to the neighbours.** I was a victim.** I never had any problems until Mrs.Davies moved in.** She tried to be a cut above the rest.'
Daily Mail, 20/02/04