|
|
Post by bancroft on Nov 16, 2023 19:38:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Nov 16, 2023 20:53:34 GMT
They walk among us
|
|
|
|
Post by walterpaisley on Nov 16, 2023 21:59:42 GMT
This is worrying to me that jury's cannot see where this will end. So a jury (having heard all the evidence and arguments presented in court) have reached a decision people disagree with? It happens. No one's ever managed to come up with a better judicial system, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Nov 17, 2023 1:33:22 GMT
No one's ever managed to come up with a better judicial system, though. Many countries have managed to produce more intelligent inhabitants though. |
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Nov 17, 2023 13:52:00 GMT
The case was held at Southwark Crown Court.
I wonder how they recruited the jury and what the standard of the debate was.
Remember we have a City Police for the old mile wonder if the damage had been done there rather than CW would it have been handled differently.
Personally think damaging property is going too far, they could have spray painted the windows and held placards yet bringing specialist equipment to break the glass for me is encouraging criminality.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Nov 17, 2023 15:33:28 GMT
This is worrying to me that jury's cannot see where this will end. So a jury (having heard all the evidence and arguments presented in court) have reached a decision people disagree with? It happens. No one's ever managed to come up with a better judicial system, though. from the link… ‘According to XR the jury made several requests during the trial, including for an explanation of the Paris Climate Agreement and information on what the British Government has done to address the climate crisis’ Exactly what these issues have to do with whether or not using hammers to smash ‘bomb proof’ windows is a crime or not i confess i struggle to see But if it is true i think it speaks to the motion that all twelve are unfit to be called to jury service ever again. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 17, 2023 16:27:03 GMT
But then I blame the judge who should have constrained the jury to consideration of the facts and not the surrounding politics.
But then I've never been a fan of trial by jury.
|
|
|
|
Post by walterpaisley on Nov 17, 2023 16:37:36 GMT
But then I've never been a fan of trial by jury. You'd prefer what? Politically appointed judges alone? Elected judges? Combat? The Ducking Stool? |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 17, 2023 16:45:29 GMT
Don't be a wally, Wally.
I'd prefer a bench of three judges. People who can actually decide on the evidence presented rather than twelve muppets who were too dim to think of an excuse not to serve on a jury.
Especially if I was innocent (which I would be).
|
|
|
|
Post by walterpaisley on Nov 17, 2023 17:12:16 GMT
And there would still be decisions you wouldn't agree with - added to which the dimension of "who appointed THAT judge?!" that poisons so much of the discourse around judgements in America at the moment.
I only ever did jury service once. I was very young, and the panel I sat with couldn't have been more diverse in age, background, politics, etc. A truly random selection, all of whom took our duties very seriously.
It works.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 17, 2023 17:51:47 GMT
I only ever did jury service once. I was very young... Then it must've been aeons ago. I've done it more recently and (the lack of) thought process of several jurors was frankly frightening. |
|
|
|
Post by walterpaisley on Nov 17, 2023 19:09:39 GMT
A few years ago, the late Mrs P began the training to become a Magistrate.
She'd have been perfectly suited to it (a couple of friends sit on the Bench).
It's something I'd certainly consider as a retirement activity, if my "retirement" hadn't been pushed back a few years (doing it properly is pretty time consuming)..
|
|
|
|
Post by seniorcitizen007 on Nov 17, 2023 19:17:54 GMT
An acquaintance of mine was called for jury duty. She was receiving full DLA for "mental health issues" (she was a "complete fruitcake"). She was looking forward to being on a jury involved in a rape case. One of her habits was approaching men late at night and inviting them to rape her. I contacted the authorities ... and was told that it was up to her to get her psychiatrist to arrange for her to be excused jury duty. I told her son about the situation and he sorted it.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Nov 17, 2023 22:13:15 GMT
And there would still be decisions you wouldn't agree with - added to which the dimension of "who appointed THAT judge?!" that poisons so much of the discourse around judgements in America at the moment. I only ever did jury service once. I was very young, and the panel I sat with couldn't have been more diverse in age, background, politics, etc. A truly random selection, all of whom took our duties very seriously. It works. i’ve never done jury service. Mist of my friends have, my wife and both daughters have I attribute not being chosen to my lifelong support for bringing back hanging |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Nov 19, 2023 19:59:15 GMT
What do you expect when a large percentage of the population are delusional virtue signalers.
Surely the CPS should be able to appeal verdicts like this because the jury are clearly virtue signaling their morals (that they got off social media) rather than studying the evidence.
|
|
