The Court of Appeal has ruled that a criminal trial can take place at Crown Court without a jury for the first time in England and Wales.
The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, made legal history by agreeing to allow the trial to be heard by a judge alone.
But Liberty director of policy Isabella Sankey said: "This is a dangerous precedent.
"The right to jury trial isn't just a hallowed principle but a practice that ensures that one class of people don't sit in judgement over another and the public have confidence in an open and representative justice system.
"What signal do we send to witnesses if the police can't even protect juries?"
Why not?
It works like that in continental Europe, we have a jury only for the worst crimes (murder...).
No thanks.
Because Judges are unaccountable, their sentences suck, i don't trust them.
why? Sometimes there are 3 judges, they "vote" the sentence
but maybe our laws are different. Here, they are quite precise, everything is written and the judges only apply it
Judges may as well make laws at the way they go about things over here, i have no idea who our law lords are and they head our highest court. The PM appoints them with little to no check or confirmation process so the positions could be highly politicised.
No, this is dangerous imo.
BBC NEWS | UK | First trial without jury approved
Dangerous, knowing our Govt. this will become common.
I don't like this at all, what the heck is going on with our system.
Does anyone even know who our law lords are and we are supposed to trust them :roll:
why? Sometimes there are 3 judges, they "vote" the sentence
but maybe our laws are different. Here, they are quite precise, everything is written and the judges only apply it
I don't know how the common law system works, but usually, when a judge does the work without jury, there are many rules that limit his power. UK is a democracy, so I would be astonished that they create a system that is anti-democratic.
That's absolutely astounding and the rationales for it are terrible.
If the defendant was not allowed a trial by jury, it's just another reason I am proud to be an American.
It's horrible isn't it?
They can't be upfront about it and just say they want more power taken from people.
Judges are unelected, unaccountable and are open to the whims of politicans. No seperation of power. We are so screwed.
BBC NEWS | UK | First trial without jury approved
Dangerous, knowing our Govt. this will become common.
I don't like this at all, what the heck is going on with our system.
Does anyone even know who our law lords are and we are supposed to trust them :roll:
If only we could steal your constitution and implement it here ....
I bet OJ was as well?If the defendant was not allowed a trial by jury, it's just another reason I am proud to be an American.
I bet OJ was as well?
The same as in the UK, we have Crown Courts and Magistrate Courts.In the U.S. trials by jury are usually reserved for Felony (more serious) charges, in what we call "Superior" courts.
Misdemeanor charges are handled in District courts by a single presiding judge. Misdemeanor verdicts can be appealed to a superior court judge for judicial review or for an opportunity to have a jury hear the case, but this usually doesn't happen that often.
Then you would agree how wonderful its is to be a signatory to the European Court of Human RightsJudges may as well make laws at the way they go about things over here, i have no idea who our law lords are and they head our highest court. The PM appoints them with little to no check or confirmation process so the positions could be highly politicised.
No, this is dangerous imo.
To bare arms? I dont think the monarchy would agree with that, we may end our "subject of the crown" status and become complete citizens.If only we could steal your constitution and implement it here ....
To bare arms? I dont think the monarchy would agree with that, we may end our "subject of the crown" status and become complete citizens.
If the defendant was not allowed a trial by jury, it's just another reason I am proud to be an American.
he looks Bi-Polar to me, also rather camp
We have judges who say that too, but the fact is that the act of applying a law necessarily requires some level of interpretation. The BGB and Code Civil are massive, but even they cannot cover all possible scenarios.
Then you would agree how wonderful its is to be a signatory to the European Court of Human Rights
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?