Call me a cynical old flightless bird if you must, but I am deeply suspicious of the decision to allow a criminal trial without a jury.
It may well be that it would be difficult or even, shock horror, costly! to properly protect a jury from being nobbled, but I don't think this is sending the right message to criminals or to potential witnesses or potential jurors.
Once this dangerous precedent has been set, I predict that there will be rather a lot of trials without the cost and inconvenience of juries. Followed by a lot of appeals about human rights.
More dosh for m'learned friends, the bastards.
The Penguin
3 comments:
You make a very good point.
But I take exception to you illustrating it with a picture of Joe Dredd. the Judges came to power purely because the existing politians and judiciary had become so corrupt and invloved the people in senseless wars ( presceint eh?)
The Judges were trained ( or in Joe's case bred) to dispense the Law fairly,without fear or favour. Their actions may seem harsh but they are the law.
from a Friend of The Mighty Tharg
Sadly our own "law" are not from that ilk.
Not quite the thin end of the wedge, Penguin. That came with dispensing with juries in complex fraud cases. NOW we get the second stage.
It's all part of the plan to harmonise UK legal systems with the EU Corpus Juris (but you knew that, right?).
Post a Comment