@JuliaHB1 @DPJHodges They're not. Vast majority of cases that go to a jury end with convictions.
-
-
-
@alexmassie@DPJHodges yes but wouldn't that be because most cases are only brought if CPS already believe strong chance of conviction? -
@JuliaHB1@DPJHodges Indeed. So this proposal means juries should be asked to find a defendent guilty *because a trial is taking place* Mad. -
@alexmassie@DPJHodges I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it, just that it's an interesting read and worth considering. -
@JuliaHB1@alexmassie@DPJHodges Absolutely it was a valid point but got the pettifoggers jumping up and down. "Dyou know the law dear boy" - End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@JuliaHB1@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges it would shift some of the burden of proof from the Crown to the defence. -
@JuliaHB1@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges the suggestion the system favours the defendant is completely ignorant of the workings of the system -
@Rishpig@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges of course it does! Absurd to say anything different. -
@JuliaHB1@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges your ignorance is astonishing. Judges largely drawn from prosecutors. Thus, generally, favour pros 1. -
@Rishpig@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges see, you're just being offensive, not debating. The onus is on prosecution to prove, not defence. -
@JuliaHB1@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges suggesting somebody's opinion is "absurd" is hardly pleasant. Pot kettle black. -
@Rishpig@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges No, it WAS absurd to suggest that my comment was ignorant. It wasn't. -
@JuliaHB1@johnsweeneyroar@DPJHodges you have an intimate knowledge of the british justice system do you? - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@JuliaHB1 It's genuinely amazing what you can't discuss isn't it? -
@DPJHodges Extraordinary. Why do people get so angry at someone simply raising the idea that there might be a different way of doing things? -
@JuliaHB1 In this case it's a lot of lawyers who think only lawyers can hold a view on this. And it has to be the same view as well. -
@DPJHodges which is strange since the actual verdicts are given by ordinary non-legally trained people on juries. Funny that, eh?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@JuliaHB1@DPJHodges not just naive but dangerously naive, the pair of yoy -
@Simon_Craven@DPJHodges FFS, I have not said I agree with Dan. I said it was a fascinating read. Rather different things, don't you think? -
@JuliaHB1@DPJHodges Julia, you are being disingenuous if you do not accept that you have strongly implied agreement with him -
@Simon_Craven@DPJHodges I have implied agreement with the idea that it is worth discussing. Is that ok with you? -
@JuliaHB1@DPJHodges Absolutely fine with me and clearly you are discussing away. Do you have an actual view then?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.