Crime and punishment
Discussion
hutchst said:
Another inherent weakness in the system is establishing a politically neutral jury in a political trial.
This trial is political, in the sense that nobody really gives a stuff about driving at 41mph in a 30 limit, so potential jail time for a minor speeding transgression will be seen by many as victimisation, particularly when the victim is a disabled black lesbian commie, who has gone through life being convinced by the society that she inhabits that she is a victim. It is compounded by holding the trial at the Old Bailey (why is that??) for a number of reasons. The jury is selected (I presume) from the London boroughs, where most people don't own cars, and most people in London vote Labour and return Labour MPs.
I have a feeling that if the trial was held in Cambridge, where the offence took place, there would be a diferent outcome.
Does anybody know why the trial was at the Old Bailey, and if there is a hung jury and a retrial, will that also be at the Old Bailey?
Seems wierd I thought it was not held in cambridge but maybe as she is the MP and has the popular vote there they thought it unable to get a fair trial.This trial is political, in the sense that nobody really gives a stuff about driving at 41mph in a 30 limit, so potential jail time for a minor speeding transgression will be seen by many as victimisation, particularly when the victim is a disabled black lesbian commie, who has gone through life being convinced by the society that she inhabits that she is a victim. It is compounded by holding the trial at the Old Bailey (why is that??) for a number of reasons. The jury is selected (I presume) from the London boroughs, where most people don't own cars, and most people in London vote Labour and return Labour MPs.
I have a feeling that if the trial was held in Cambridge, where the offence took place, there would be a diferent outcome.
Does anybody know why the trial was at the Old Bailey, and if there is a hung jury and a retrial, will that also be at the Old Bailey?
I'm reminded that there was also a retrial in the Pryce case.
agtlaw said:
Deadlocked. Jury discharged. Retrial pending.
Quelle surprise. As I predicted last week no unanimity or majority.agtlaw said:
I'm reminded that there was also a retrial in the Pryce case.
Do you suppose that the jury in the current case are equally intellectually challenged?What happens if the same result occurs a second time?
Does the mincing machine grind on yet again until a not guilty/guilty verdict is returned?
Derek Smith said:
jfire said:
So basically if you chuck in enough nonsense excuses to confuse the jury you'll get off
I'll be sure to blame my brother/ MS neither of which I have, if I ever get in to trouble.
It's a common enough tactic of defences. If it is felt that there's overwhelming evidence of a client/paymaster's guilt then they need one of the methods out of the book most lawyers keep. You can't blame a jury in such cases. I'll be sure to blame my brother/ MS neither of which I have, if I ever get in to trouble.
An inherent weakness in the system is also a major safeguard. The jury is made up of you and me. We decide guilt. However, the unprincipled can exploit this.
There was a case where a jury found not guilty and the judge, incensed, kept them back and read out the defendant’s pre-cons. Well out of order I felt. It was the talking point in the nick I was in for some time, almost all bobbies feeling that the jury would go home feeling guilty when it was not their fault.
Of course, not knowing all the ins and outs of this case, I cannot say if any of the above applies to this woman.
I had to drop a case, drink driving, against a prominent member of the local establishment when I was in the City police and I was, to put it mildly, irritated. An experienced bobby said not to worry as they will always come again. And the bloke did, within a couple of months.
Whilst that’s no problem with traffic offences in the main, although letting an alcoholic out on the roads driving a powerful car was dangerous, it is not so easy to accept letting a child killer stalk again. The last thing one wants is for them to come again.
hutchst said:
Another inherent weakness in the system is establishing a politically neutral jury in a political trial.
This trial is political, in the sense that nobody really gives a stuff about driving at 41mph in a 30 limit, so potential jail time for a minor speeding transgression will be seen by many as victimisation, particularly when the victim is a disabled black lesbian commie, who has gone through life being convinced by the society that she inhabits that she is a victim. It is compounded by holding the trial at the Old Bailey (why is that??) for a number of reasons. The jury is selected (I presume) from the London boroughs, where most people don't own cars, and most people in London vote Labour and return Labour MPs.
I have a feeling that if the trial was held in Cambridge, where the offence took place, there would be a diferent outcome.
Does anybody know why the trial was at the Old Bailey, and if there is a hung jury and a retrial, will that also be at the Old Bailey?
The Old Bailey is in the Cities of London and Westminster constituency, currently represented by a Conservative. The MP for Cambridge is Labour.This trial is political, in the sense that nobody really gives a stuff about driving at 41mph in a 30 limit, so potential jail time for a minor speeding transgression will be seen by many as victimisation, particularly when the victim is a disabled black lesbian commie, who has gone through life being convinced by the society that she inhabits that she is a victim. It is compounded by holding the trial at the Old Bailey (why is that??) for a number of reasons. The jury is selected (I presume) from the London boroughs, where most people don't own cars, and most people in London vote Labour and return Labour MPs.
I have a feeling that if the trial was held in Cambridge, where the offence took place, there would be a diferent outcome.
Does anybody know why the trial was at the Old Bailey, and if there is a hung jury and a retrial, will that also be at the Old Bailey?
Although of course juries are drawn from a wider area than constituencies- I served at Southwark Crown Court while living in Hampstead and Kilburn.
As for why it was at the Old Bailey, I think trials of MPs tend to be in London. Chris Huhne's was (he was MP for Eastleigh in Hampshire, the offence was in Essex).
Red Devil said:
Do you suppose that the jury in the current case are equally intellectually challenged?
What happens if the same result occurs a second time?
Does the mincing machine grind on yet again until a not guilty/guilty verdict is returned?
If it went through a couple of trials without verdict, would it get to the point that it's an abuse of process and stayed (or withdrawn by CPS to avoid stay in the hope more evidence pops up one day)?What happens if the same result occurs a second time?
Does the mincing machine grind on yet again until a not guilty/guilty verdict is returned?
AlexiusG55 said:
The Old Bailey is in the Cities of London and Westminster constituency, currently represented by a Conservative. The MP for Cambridge is Labour.
Although of course juries are drawn from a wider area than constituencies- I served at Southwark Crown Court while living in Hampstead and Kilburn.
As for why it was at the Old Bailey, I think trials of MPs tend to be in London. Chris Huhne's was (he was MP for Eastleigh in Hampshire, the offence was in Essex).
Thanks, but I note that currently 49 out of 73 London MPs are labour (67%) and 5 out of 7 Cambridgeshire MPs are Tory (71%), which could be construed as empirical evidence of the political make up of the jury pool. And Huhne's trial was at Southwark, my passing interest is in the allocation of criminal cases to the Old Bailey. Although of course juries are drawn from a wider area than constituencies- I served at Southwark Crown Court while living in Hampstead and Kilburn.
As for why it was at the Old Bailey, I think trials of MPs tend to be in London. Chris Huhne's was (he was MP for Eastleigh in Hampshire, the offence was in Essex).
The retrial is before a High Court judge (sitting in the Crown Court) and a jury. I doubt that the last jury were as challenged as the Pryce jury. A significant difference here is that the jury were a man down. Therefore, the prospect of deadlock increased significantly. If only two members of an 11 member jury dissent from the majority then that means deadlock - whereas in a 12 member jury that would have been an acceptable majority verdict. Of course, we don’t know whether they were evenly split or two jurors were holding out - and we don’t know if the majority were for NG or guilty.
Thanks for that. I get that it's a first tier court for indictable offences, but I guess someone, somewhere exercises some discretion to move a trial from (in this instance) Cambridge to the Old Bailey. Who is that person, and is there any degree of transparency, that the public can see what factors were considered in reaching the decision?
This is not a major crime (at least not in my opinion) and this lady is a low grade back bench politician, only elected to parliament a year ago, she's hardly high profile, and it won't rock the nation if she gets sent down. Huhne, by comparison, was a government minister at the time he was charged.
This is not a major crime (at least not in my opinion) and this lady is a low grade back bench politician, only elected to parliament a year ago, she's hardly high profile, and it won't rock the nation if she gets sent down. Huhne, by comparison, was a government minister at the time he was charged.
hutchst said:
Thanks for that. I get that it's a first tier court for indictable offences, but I guess someone, somewhere exercises some discretion to move a trial from (in this instance) Cambridge to the Old Bailey. Who is that person, and is there any degree of transparency, that the public can see what factors were considered in reaching the decision?
This is not a major crime (at least not in my opinion) and this lady is a low grade back bench politician, only elected to parliament a year ago, she's hardly high profile, and it won't rock the nation if she gets sent down. Huhne, by comparison, was a government minister at the time he was charged.
What's your problem with it being moved to the Central Criminal Court?This is not a major crime (at least not in my opinion) and this lady is a low grade back bench politician, only elected to parliament a year ago, she's hardly high profile, and it won't rock the nation if she gets sent down. Huhne, by comparison, was a government minister at the time he was charged.
I'd disagree that it is not a major crime.
The defence can ask for the trial to be moved. We don't know if this occurred in this particular case.
Starfighter said:
A friend has MS and a driving licence. Her doctor signs her off every year. It is reportable but nota mandatry ban.
I appreciate its not automatic revocation, but my point is she is claiming memory issues and its come back but seemly it appears she has never notified the DVLA or her Doctor has. More likely is she is lying and playing the poor black, disable woman in a hope she won't be found guilty. Any decent QC would be presenting proof of this was it the case that medical records etc existed to substantiate her bull crap.
Guilty !
Fiona Onasanya: Peterborough MP guilty in speeding case http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshir...
Fiona Onasanya: Peterborough MP guilty in speeding case http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshir...
fastbikes76 said:
Guilty !
Fiona Onasanya: Peterborough MP guilty in speeding case http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshir...
Great result but it begs the question WHY do it in the first place? £100 plus 3 points I wouldn't have thought had a major impact on her finances or working life. After all it was 41 in a 30 limit. Not exactly breaking the sound barrier!Fiona Onasanya: Peterborough MP guilty in speeding case http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshir...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff