Plod has 'regrets'...

[Mottie]

Are you seriously attempting to state that having the right to protest directly leads to people throwing coloured powder?

Yep. And worse. Look at the 'protest' in Wales the other night. I bet you wouldn’t feel the same if your car was one of those that were overturned and burnt.

 

[fixitflav]

Yep. And worse. Look at the 'protest' in Wales the other night. I bet you wouldn’t feel the same if your car was one of those that were overturned and burnt.

On that subject, why are the police on the back foot over this, and trying to cover things up? What's wrong with them following a couple of kids on electric bikes, without helmets?

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Yep. And worse. Look at the 'protest' in Wales the other night. I bet you wouldn’t feel the same if your car was one of those that were overturned and burnt.

I've seen people protesting about library cuts.

Nothing bad happened and no books were harmed. It was just people outside protesting about the cuts.

Should they be stopped from protesting? Arrested ?

Until an offence is committed then it's no different to you protesting about protestors.

Maybe the punishments for offences are not strong enough, but that's a separate issue. Unless you are easily led. You're not easily led are you?

 

[carmanmemoranda]

On that subject, why are the police on the back foot over this, and trying to cover things up? What's wrong with them following a couple of kids on electric bikes, without helmets?

Sounds like they had reasons, so why the cover up is a fair question?

 

[Brigadier]

On that subject, why are the police on the back foot over this, and trying to cover things up? What's wrong with them following a couple of kids on electric bikes, without helmets?

Coz. it is a sad state of affairs nowadays, with the feral class calling the shots.

 

[fixitflav]

Coz. it is a sad state of affairs nowadays, with the feral class calling the shots.

Sounds like the locals saying plod can't enforce the law on our patch or we'll riot.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Sounds like the locals saying plod can't enforce the law on our patch or we'll riot.

Lack of police numbers and systems to deal with issues ?

 

[Mottie]

Sounds like the locals saying plod can't enforce the law on our patch or we'll riot.

It sounds to me like one of those estates from hell where half the kids whiz around the street on illegal bikes/peds/quads. The other half all have Cane Corso's with cropped ears or Bully XL's! King Chavs will, of course, have both.

 

[Odds]

The right of a jury to decide a case according to conscience, described in the US literature as “jury nullification”, has always been something of a dark secret in English criminal justice; tolerated but ideally not mentioned in public. Juries have the power to return what is condescendingly called a “perverse verdict” but are never told this by judges in case it encourages them to do so. Trudi Warner’s offence seems to be to have let this particular jurisprudential cat out of the bag.

The “secret power” of jury nullification, as set out by Sonali Chakravarti, professor of government at Wesleyan University and author of Radical Enfranchisement in the Jury Room and Public Life, is as an effective weapon both “against the tyranny of the state” and “against the tyranny of police officers”. Indeed, one of the most potent justifications for independent jury decision-making is as an antidote to the endemic and institutional corruption of decision-making by police, prosecutors and professional judiciaries, to which “no country is immune”.

Richard Vogler@the Guardian

 

[securespark]

A horse terrified by unexpected noise, such as a rape alarm, can become a serious danger if it bolts in panic into a crowd.

Horses trained for public service (like police horses) and military horses are trained to be bombproof (IE not spooked by loud noises or sudden movements).

 

[motorbiking]

The right of a jury to decide a case according to conscience, described in the US literature as “jury nullification”, has always been something of a dark secret in English criminal justice; tolerated but ideally not mentioned in public. Juries have the power to return what is condescendingly called a “perverse verdict” but are never told this by judges in case it encourages them to do so. Trudi Warner’s offence seems to be to have let this particular jurisprudential cat out of the bag.

The “secret power” of jury nullification, as set out by Sonali Chakravarti, professor of government at Wesleyan University and author of Radical Enfranchisement in the Jury Room and Public Life, is as an effective weapon both “against the tyranny of the state” and “against the tyranny of police officers”. Indeed, one of the most potent justifications for independent jury decision-making is as an antidote to the endemic and institutional corruption of decision-making by police, prosecutors and professional judiciaries, to which “no country is immune”.

Richard Vogler@the Guardian

Its a bit more complex than the above.

Juries are sworn to deliver a true verdict based on the evidence. A judge will guide them specifically on the facts of the case, the required legal test that must be applied and if the evidence meets the test, the verdict they must deliver. If they choose to ignore this and deliver a perverse verdict (which is not condescending at all it is perverse in the sense the have perverted justice) the prosecutor can easily go to the court of appeal for a remedy/retrial. It only becomes an issue if they think a new Jury will also be perverse.

 

[Roy Bloom]

Its a bit more complex than the above.

Juries are sworn to deliver a true verdict based on the evidence. A judge will guide them specifically on the facts of the case, the required legal test that must be applied and if the evidence meets the test, the verdict they must deliver. If they choose to ignore this and deliver a perverse verdict (which is not condescending at all it is perverse in the sense the have perverted justice) the prosecutor can easily go to the court of appeal for a remedy/retrial. It only becomes an issue if they think a new Jury will also be perverse.

Yeah, we know you like to interpret the law to suit your own agenda.

Jury trial is supremely important to the British public and it would be politically impossible for the Government to remove it. So the courts have surreptitiously sought to undermine the substance of jury trial, while preserving its appearance.

Defend Our Juries – Jurors have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to their conscience

defendourjuries.org

 

[motorbiking]

I read the first few sentences of the above and realised it was complete load of rubbish.

Juries do not make law.

 

[Roy Bloom]

I read the first few sentences of the above and realised it was complete load of rubbish.

Juries do not make law.

I read all of your post and I realized it was a typical deflection and strawman argument.

 

[motorbiking]

Do you think a Juror should research a case in order to see if they agree with the prosecution based on their conscience?