Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[crazy canuck]

I'm arguing for the right to call for a trial by jury, not mandatory trial by jury. For most offences it will just be trial by magistrate, as it is now. But if someone is in a politically sensitive trial (such as those silly buggers with the orange powder at stonehenge or the "we support Palestine Action" crowd, I think it is only right that they can call for a trial by jury.

I agree, Jury trials are essential to the administration of justice in a common law jurisdiction.


I also agree that it is not helpful for someone to argue that civil law jurisdictions don't have jury trials so it's all OK. The criminal law and procedure is fundamentally different in those countries.

[Sheilbh]

I agree, Jury trials are essential to the administration of justice in a common law jurisdiction.

Something it seems Keir Starmer agreed with when he was a humble barrister writing for the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers house mag, Socialist Lawyer (that feels like more of a defined term than an appealing title ), back in 1992 when he called for all trials to be jury trials regardless of the expense

I think that's going too far. I don't mind raising the bar of what is just heard by a magistrate and what can be heard by a jury (as well as what must be heard by a jury). Similarly there have been numerous white collar and complex fraud trials that have collapsed here because of the sheer complexity and volume of evidence (I think one lasted for two years before it fell apart - I think those cases are unreasonable for a jury and actually better suited to a judge.

So I don't mind some reform and I'm not a jury absolutist but murder, rape, manslaughter and certain "public interest" cases is far, far too narrow.