matticus
Guru
https://barristermagazine.com/we-ar...rights-of-jurors-in-the-twenty-first-century/
Prosecuted for publicly stating the law, it seems.
Prosecuted for publicly stating the law, it seems.
https://barristermagazine.com/we-ar...rights-of-jurors-in-the-twenty-first-century/
Prosecuted for publicly stating the law, it seems.
https://barristermagazine.com/we-ar...rights-of-jurors-in-the-twenty-first-century/
Prosecuted for publicly stating the law, it seems.
I am uncomfortable with these prosecutions, but the jury nullification idea also makes me uncomfortable, because there's no guarantee that it will be used against a repressive law, merely that the jury may refuse to convict under an unpopular law, regardless of the injustice or justice of the case.
the jury nullification idea also makes me uncomfortable, because there's no guarantee that it will be used against a repressive law, merely that the jury may refuse to convict under an unpopular law, regardless of the injustice or justice of the case.
And do you think juries are never influenced by personal bias and prejudice when they vote?
I would hate to think the UK is anywhere near going down that road.
It's beyond stupid to stand outside a court with a placard aimed at jurors, even if that placard says nothing particularly controversial.
Should what you see as stupidity result in a criminal record and a possible custodial sentence? What if it’s not a placard they’re holding but a copy of one of your favourite newspapers displaying an inflammatory headline?
Who is the plaque outside the Old Bailey aimed at? Is that equally stupid?
InconceivableIt's also inconceivable the paper would have a headline which could be said to be trying to influence a sitting jury.
Inconceivable
I don’t think this is as black and white as you think.
If you allow Trudi Warner, then you have to allow idiots like Tommy Robinson Stephen Yaxley Lennon standing outside with a banner trying to advise a jury that they can pick and choose what to do.