UK to abolish trial by jury.

Jeslek

Banned
SOURCE: http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-12034929,00.html

Thousands of defendants will lose the right to be tried by jury in sweeping reforms to be unveiled next week by the Home Secretary, David Blunkett.

Judges will be allowed to sit alone in cases where they believe there is a danger of intimidation and in complex cases.

And the so-called double jeopardy rule, where a defendant cannot be tried twice for the same offence, could also be abolished.

I don't understand that last part. Does that mean if you smash two cars' windows in a parking lot they can try you 9, 10, 11+ times for the same crime?
 

PT

Off 'Motherfuckin' Topic Elite
It means that if you are tried for a crime, and found innocent, they can try you for the same crime again.
 

Q

New Member
Does the UK have the same kind of appeals process as the US? I'm guessing it's pretty similar....sounds like this could turn into a giant log jam to me.
 

ris

New Member
there does appear to be some confusion. the white paper that blunkett will reveal this week has supposedly been leaked, although some are saying that the stuff in it is from an earlier draft version.

there has been suggestion of removing double jeapardy for a while, but only for the most serious miscarriages of justice, such as the murder of stephen lawrence. i'm not in favour of it because it will push up the red-tape and who gets to choose the most serious crimes?

the reduction of trial by jury is also disturbing, but it seems to be being proposed for cases where the issues are highly specialised / complex, and where jury can be intimidated.

i'm not sure that if these things are proposed they will get through parliament and the house of lords, let alone be used. i can envisage that if it did get through and were about to be used the campaining would be so strong that it would be dropped.
 

Ardsgaine

New Member
ris said:
there does appear to be some confusion. the white paper that blunkett will reveal this week has supposedly been leaked, although some are saying that the stuff in it is from an earlier draft version.

I'm a little hazy on the details of British government. Do you guys have the equivalent of a Constitution? Are these protections part of such a document, or are they simply statutes that can be repealed or superseded? What is the process for altering such fundamental protections?

In the US, these things are guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and it would take an ammendment to the Constitution to alter them. Altering the Constitution is an arduous process that makes it extremely unlikely that such protections could ever be tampered with.
 

ris

New Member
i'm not sure what bit of our law-making process is similar but to get stuff put through parliament it has to be put into a document that is then circulated before being voted on. these are usually called white papers. these go to press groups, public bodies etc and the public can request them if they have a strong need for a large paperweight.

often there are drafts made that get leaked, much of the stuff that is upsetting civil rights groups [trial by jury and double jeapardy] in this case was in an earlier version, it is uncertain whether it is in the final one.

if it clears the house of commons then it goes to the lords where it must be passed by the peers before becoming enshrined in law.

we don't have a constitution. statutes can be repealed and changed all the time. the tories have already said they may repeal the reclassification of cannabis if they are elected. i think what stops alterations to the most important laws is common sense, the law of tort that underpins the british legal system is all about the ever changing nature of society and example cases etc.
there is a certain inherent risk, but there is also a great deal of flexibility and no constraints.
 

PT

Off 'Motherfuckin' Topic Elite
No constitution in the UK? That suprises me, guess I just can't imagine there not being some kind of solid, unchangeable base. Although I agree with the ever changing nature of society, I like the stability of the constitution.

Question for you Brits, what is the gun law over there, I've heard you can't own firearms, not even for hunting or anything? Or is it just stricter licensing?
 

ris

New Member
you can own a gun but it's not easy.
you have to be licensed to own shotguns and rifles, but the law is very tight [secured boxes bolted to a secure structure, 3 7-lever locks or somehting, guns not loaded, cartridges stored seperately i think]

pistols are even harder to own, i'm not sure its legal to have any at all.

semi and full automatic weapons are illegal too i think.

its not seen as personal security, firearms in the uk are for sports or land-management. my dad and stepfather both own 12-bore shotguns, they are licensed and conform to the regualtions but i'm not sure they've used them in 10 years.
 

ris

New Member
not sure, from what i've gathered in the press many of teh illegal guns that are out there are converted replicas. i'm sure that in some of the larger cities in the rough areas, and with some youth cultures getting a gun is easy and considered necessary.

i doubt that most uk residents would know how to get one so i'd say pretty hard.
 

ris

New Member
sorry, should add that i'm referring to pistols there.

if i wanted to get a 12-bore i'm sure i could, provided that i meet all the police background checks, licensing requirements etc. it would take a few weeks/months to arrange though i'd have thought.
 

Ardsgaine

New Member
ris said:
i'm sure that in some of the larger cities in the rough areas, and with some youth cultures getting a gun is easy and considered necessary.

i doubt that most uk residents would know how to get one so i'd say pretty hard.

I was thinking more of the criminal element. If you take a look at my post in the Gun Ownership thread, I think you'll see what I was driving at. I feel that if it's easy for criminals to get guns, then private citizens should be able to own them too. There was a time in England when the police could do their patrols with nothing but a nightstick. I seem to recall hearing not long ago that they've had to give them guns. (You can reply in the other thread if you like.)
 

ris

New Member
police in the uk don't carry guns, they have batons and some have pepper spray.

only the armed response units have guns [h&k's if memory serves]

i'm not sure that all that much of the criminal elements in the uk have guns, violent crime here is still knife oriented. and many of the 'guns' are actually still replica's [unchanged ones]. our worst gun experiences have always been with legally owned weapons in the hands of nut-bags. in both cases it has lead to a tightening of the law to prevent it.
 

unclehobart

New Member
In those cases it was usually grandpappys gun from the old days as a simple inherited hand me down getting into the hands of unbalanced grandkids with grudges.

In the US, where we have guns... you get gun murders
In Europe, where you dont have guns... you get knife murders
In India, where even knives have been banned... you get mobs breaking branches off of tress to club people to death with.
 

Q

New Member
On a sorta similar vein. I was watching a program on body armor on the Discovery channel one day and I was shocked to learn that kevlar, the material they make bullet proof vests out of, is useless against a knife. Pretty weird, I thought. It'll stop a .38 but a knife will go right through it.
 

ris

New Member
intersting hypothesis unc, and returns me to the notion of 'guns don't kill people, but they do make it a darn sight easier'.

lets all vote for clubbing with bits of tree, the effort of having to tear at an oak will deter some :D
 

Ardsgaine

New Member
ris said:
lets all vote for clubbing with bits of tree, the effort of having to tear at an oak will deter some :D

Dunno... our ancestors did alright with clubs. Besides, who wants a three day waiting period to buy a baseball bat? ;)
 
Top