Non aviation content. Play nice – No religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
#1755434
Thanks @Miscellaneous Right on cue with scornful ad hominem remarks which I will of course ignore.

In common with many people of the Scottish persuasion I look forward to the further interactions of senior SNP members

Edit
Inter alia I now look forward to being called for jury service having been exempt for my entire professional life .
Further edit: Ha! They’ve got four weeks :roll:

Peter
Last edited by PeteSpencer on Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.
#1755444
Bill Haddow wrote:The trouble with the jury system is that it is based on a bunch of people too dumb to avoid jury service.

Bill H


What a mean, despicable and selfish person you are BiIL Haddow.

I was asked to jury service last year and was happy to do so. I saw it as part of my duty as a citizen to do so.

The process was interesting. It was very clear that we could only use the evidence presented to us and everyone - procecution, defence, the Judge and the court officials did everything they could to help us do so.

The case we tried was similar, sexual assault and assault. Very sordid.
All the jurors were careful to discuss things fairly and listen to each other's points of view. We were aware that we had an important duty and were determined to do as good a job as we could.

In the end, after something like 5 hours of deliberations over two days, we came up with majority verdicts, not guilty for the sexual assault and guilty for the assault.

A huge problem in sexual cases is the lack of witnesses. Usually it is a matter of balancing two conflicting accounts and this puts the jury into the position of judging the two witnesses, which do you think was more likely to be correct. You also have to be sure. Probably is not good enough.
kanga liked this
#1755445
@defcribed can't say I disagree with that. :D

This is much bigger than inappropriate behaviour between individuals and whether it was consensual. Let's say the current global situation is buying NS and the SNP some time.

If we accept the colloquial saying of the man with the chip on his shoulder ( :tongue: ) then there has been some very serious skullduggery going on within the SNP and this has never been anything to do with his behaviour towards women.
#1755518
PeteSpencer wrote:Old colloquial native English saying Frank.
Ask a native.

Peter :wink:


Trés drôle.

:roll:

In the British legal system one is innocent until proven guilty, and I would have assumed that this principle would be adhered to by most law abiding brits, just surprised that there are people who think the contrary or think that to suggest that somehow a generalisation that there must be something shady of those who have been tried but not found guilty.

I can think of, and indeed it is very easy to find pages of clinicians, who have been tried and not found guilty; are they all somehow forever under suspicion as there is 'no smoke without a fire'

And where does that principle start - a minor complaint, a complaint to the GMC or a trial in court?
kanga liked this
#1755525
Oh, lighten up ffs

And it's très.

FWIW I found it saddening and, frankly almost unbelievable that the jury decided that all eleven women were lying under oath in a Crown Court.
And what about the 'unproven' verdict? No room for even a teensy weensy bit of doubt?/fire/smoke.

I'll leave you to answer your own question about physicians.

Any road up , gotta go: Just about to have FaceTime a sing song of French kids' songs with my grand daughter. I never realised that the last verse of 'Au claire de la lune' is a bit raunchy'.

But then so is English 'Foggy foggy dew'

Peter :wink:
Last edited by PeteSpencer on Wed Mar 25, 2020 3:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#1755531
While on a two week jury trial (as a juror) on a Threat to Kill & Kidnapping charge. After about 4 days we found the defendant not guilty on all elements of the charges , and critisised the Police and CPS for bringing the case to court, and one of the witnesses was escorted from the stand after his evidence by police to be intervewed on his statements regarding a firearm. But was a most interesting experience to see the system working at first hand and in a jury room.
Last edited by FlarePath on Wed Mar 25, 2020 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#1755533
PeteSpencer wrote:FWIW I found it saddening and, frankly almost unbelievable that the jury decided that all eleven women were lying under oath in a Crown Court.

Have a read and see if it makes it any more feasible?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-52012145

PeteSpencer wrote:And what about the 'unproven' verdict? No room for even a teensy weensy bit of doubt.

Not proven has exactly the same outcome as not guilty, in that it is a verdict of innocence.

Not all jurors agreed, they were majority verdicts.
#1755562
Not proven is actually an acquittal. I believe it was historically the equivalent of not guilty before the not guilty option was introduced. For some reason it was retained.

I hold my hands up to having little knowledge though.

If you consider a not guilty verdict, even south of the border, it is essentially a not proven (beyond reasonable doubt) verdict, is it not? :D
kanga liked this