|
Post by happyjack on Mar 30, 2024 10:35:41 GMT
I see the logic in having a single set of laws across the UK, and there is much to be said for it, but how do you think the English people and England’s legal profession would react if they were forced to abandon their current laws and legal system and adopt Scottish legal practice and Scots Law instead? I can’t imagine that they would be relaxed about doing so tbh.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 30, 2024 10:39:39 GMT
Perhaps a more cogent question would be to ask why Scotland still needs its own legal system after more than three centuries in the Union?
What is the practical benefit and what is the incremental cost?
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Mar 30, 2024 10:43:56 GMT
Perhaps a more cogent question would be to ask why Scotland still needs its own legal system after more than three centuries in the Union? What is the practical benefit and what is the incremental cost? Well why does England need its own legal system. Why not adopt Scottish law. Scottish law requires best evidence. Englsih law takes the word of one corrupt cop. And in terms of cost. Devolved matters do not cost the bankrupt English tax payer one penny..
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 30, 2024 10:46:02 GMT
That’s a fair point, DD, but what system would the UK adopt if laws and legal practice were to be unified? Do you just automatically assume that it would be England’s system and English law that would prevail? If so, why?
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 30, 2024 10:52:57 GMT
I presume that a unified system would include best practice from either source.
But that wasn't the question. I was asking why Scotland still needs a separate system in the 21st century. Cui bono?
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 30, 2024 10:58:02 GMT
Perhaps a more cogent question would be to ask why Scotland still needs its own legal system after more than three centuries in the Union? What is the practical benefit and what is the incremental cost? Well why does England need its own legal system. Why not adopt Scottish law. Scottish law requires best evidence. Englsih law takes the word of one corrupt cop. And in terms of cost. Devolved matters do not cost the bankrupt English tax payer one penny.. Well generating all the accompanying extraneous bumf must be costing somebody something.
Unless Farouk is running it off gratis on the Gestetner in his garden shed. In between ironing his coronation kilt and sporran that is.
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Mar 30, 2024 11:21:52 GMT
The The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act comes into force next week, there has been speculation about the consequences about this, with the theory that JK Rowling could be liable to prosecution over tweets that she has made in the past. Jim Davidson is scheduled to carry out his show in Glenrothes next week, and has had to take legal advice whether he should cancel or not. Kelly Jay Keen has decided that she is going to challenge it and is protesting in Edinburgh with some other women, www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT5rFBZ6i1U&ab_channel=TheSpectatorHumza Yousaf and his lunatic supporters have created a huge mess, fucking idiots. Ah Mr Stupid at his stupid best. Do you know Mr stupid I have restarted the copy and paste when replying to your ranting shite. I have already gave you answers less than two weeks ago and you still come away with the same drivel. So just for you here is the copy and past.. And guess what. It has not changed since the last time I posted it Ah Mr stupid at Mr stupid best. You matey with your anti Jock shit post after post will be at the top of the Q, Along with a couple of other little Englander clowns on here. And before you go ranting more clueless shite the law being applied in Scotland on April 1st has been in force in England since 2006 and 2008. In Scotland the English extension of stirring up hatred on on religion and sexual orientation did not apply in Scotland. So stop talking more undiluted shite. And the Englsih fascist Tory's have went out of their way to promote hatred in England, the party of Windrush, the party of Johnston calling Muslim woman bank robbers. Spewing Islamophobia by the likes of Braverman to Lee Anderson. To the Starkey impersonator on here. Just like your Islamophobia that the FM gave Hamas money to get his family out of Gaza.
And for your information Mr Stupid. What this hate crime act does is to take the core idea of the likes of Tory wankers and you by stirring up the likes of racial hatred, applying it to a range of protected groups. It also crimilises the fashion by the likes of you and inflammatory liars. That are back in fashion. It never leaves you Spewing utter clueless shite ranting the act says things it does not say, Criminalises things it does not criminalise. So stop talking your usual undilute shite. And I am still waiting on you to produce this evidence that the former FM stole £600,000, and the present gave Hamas money to get his family out of Gaza. And I am still waiting on you to correct anything I said in any post. And you still have not explained how the Scots are responsible for the massive bankrupt English debt. Your shit stirring ilk are long on brilliant statement making. Very short on answers.
Now the reality of what it will do. If the likes of you rant lies on a continual basis. Such as the former FM stole £600,000, or the incumbent FM gave Hamas money to get out of Gaza, or your shite about JK Rowling ranting shite it criminalises, which it does not criminalise. You can be reported to the police while in a protected group. Such as Gays, It may be or may not be a criminal offence. If it is you will be prosecuted. If not and the Police deem it is following a pattern. It will be recorded. Like your pattern of Jock hating shite. Which are total lies and smear. The laws of Scotland already has what is known as the Law of Morov Doctrine. But just for you Mr Stupid here it is. I know it is way beyond you. The doctrine states that the prosecution of two or more separate offences, each witnessed by only one person, can be grouped together to evidence the accused's pattern of behaviour to the court and the jury. Scottish law unlike the drivel you have in England that takes the word of a corrupt cop, requires corroboration. Thus although the likes of racist pillocks rant shite against say the present FM. Which on each occasion does not constitute a crime. When it does but with only one witness in this case on religious and sexual crounds. Which did not apply in Scotland Now applies. So stop ranting your usual bollocks. It records a pattern of behaviour. In ems of Juim davidson if he rants racist shite in England he will be proecuted. And would you cafe to point out where he took legal advice. Why do you feel a continual need to make to make a total prat of yourself, with Jock hating bile. .
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 30, 2024 11:31:44 GMT
I presume that a unified system would include best practice from either source. But that wasn't the question. I was asking why Scotland still needs a separate system in the 21st century. Cui bono? It needs it no more than England does and, in theory, it makes complete sense to have a unified system across the whole country. In practice, however, I suspect that it would be very problematic, disruptive, and potentially destabilising, which is probably why this has never been attempted. Best practice from either source (actually there would be 3 sources as NI has its own laws and legal system too) sounds sensible on the face of it ( although aren’t the systems and laws just different rather than inherently better or worse than each other in most cases?) but I suspect that to produce a hybrid system would be too problematic in practice and that one of the existing systems would have to prevail. If so, then going back to my original question, how do you think the English people and England’s legal profession would react if they were forced to abandon their current laws and legal system and adopt Scottish legal practice and Scots Law instead?
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Mar 30, 2024 11:35:55 GMT
That’s a fair point, DD, but what system would the UK adopt if laws and legal practice were to be unified? Do you just automatically assume that it would be England’s system and English law that would prevail? If so, why? The answer is yes. As he is deluded the English are superior. Did you know that in Scotland there is no right to a Jury trial on minor offences. That is a matter for the Procurator Fiscal. So let's say some drunken clown breaks a window in England. It is witnessed by 5 people. That clown can demand a trial by Jury. Thus you will have 5 witnesses, who could come from anywhere. The court and the Jury. To pay for. That is why crime in England is so high. In Scotland you will be put before the Burgh Court or the Sheriff court and dealt with. In the event of a NG plea The judge making the decision on the evidence.from the witnesses. The procurator fiscal determines in more serious cases, in the event of NG plea. If it will be a Sheriff and Jury trial, or a full blown Jury trial at the High Court of justiciary. The former with limited powers. The latter unlimited. under law.
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Mar 30, 2024 11:40:55 GMT
I presume that a unified system would include best practice from either source. But that wasn't the question. I was asking why Scotland still needs a separate system in the 21st century. Cui bono? It needs it no more than England does and, in theory, it makes complete sense to have a unified system across the whole country. In practice, however, I suspect that it would be very problematic, disruptive, and potentially destabilising, which is probably why this has never been attempted. Best practice from either source (actually there would be 3 sources as NI has its own laws and legal system too) sounds sensible on the face of it ( although aren’t the systems and laws just different rather than inherently better or worse than each other in most cases?) but I suspect that to produce a hybrid system would be too problematic in practice and that one of the existing systems would have to prevail. If so, then going back to my original question, how do you think the English people and England’s legal profession would react if they were forced to abandon their current laws and legal system and adopt Scottish legal practice and Scots Law instead? If the law of England ever applied in Scotland. I would emigrate. It is corrupt to the core, and not fit for the purpose. As you now recognise Scotland is a country with its own law. Ad notg a region of England . policeprofessional.com/feature/the-evidence-is-overwhelming-our-criminal-justice-system-is-no-longer-fit-for-purpose/#:~:text=about%20your%20interests.-,The%20evidence%20is%20overwhelming%3A%20our%20criminal%20justice%20system%20is%20no,Law%20Society%20president%20Simon%20Davis.
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 30, 2024 11:44:39 GMT
Where do I recognise that Scotland is a country? It is not therefore I don’t.
Neither is England a country - and neither is Scotland a region of England.
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Mar 30, 2024 11:54:49 GMT
Well why does England need its own legal system. Why not adopt Scottish law. Scottish law requires best evidence. Englsih law takes the word of one corrupt cop. And in terms of cost. Devolved matters do not cost the bankrupt English tax payer one penny.. Well generating all the accompanying extraneous bumf must be costing somebody something.
Unless Farouk is running it off gratis on the Gestetner in his garden shed. In between ironing his coronation kilt and sporran that is.
It cost you nothing. But I have to pay for your corrupt law. Why are you calling the PM Farouk. Being a billionaire I think he will have more than a garden shed. And as of Indian extraction he will have more than one kilt. I doubt if he would dress up like a pillock wearing bells on his knees and waving hankies while prancing around a pole like a dick.
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Mar 30, 2024 11:55:46 GMT
Where do I recognise that Scotland is a country? It is not therefore I don’t. Neither is England a country - and neither is Scotland a region of England. You just di with Scotish law.
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Mar 30, 2024 12:15:15 GMT
Perhaps a more cogent question would be to ask why Scotland still needs its own legal system after more than three centuries in the Union? What is the practical benefit and what is the incremental cost? Exactly, abolish division. Have one legal system for the whole UK. Abolish devolution. Cut costs. Unite our country.
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 30, 2024 12:19:57 GMT
Where do I recognise that Scotland is a country? It is not therefore I don’t. Neither is England a country - and neither is Scotland a region of England. You just di with Scotish law. This should give us an insight into the twisted logic behind the nationalist cause. In what way does my understanding that there is Scots Law translate into my recognising that Scotland is a country?
|
|