see, thats the type of bullshit that undermines your whole argument
what argument..? I've got no argument with anyone.. I've just published a poem that I saw earlier..
Emotive and inappropiate use of words like murder shows that people are not thinking or analysing rationally.
The unlawful killing of an innocent man is an emotive subject..
The unlawful killing of an innocent man is an emotive subject..
So is the sanctity of trial by jury, and the acceptance and respect of the decision made by that jury - if you don't understand why, I'd suggest you read up on a case known as 'Bushell's Case' or google 'Penn and Mead'...
[I]If Not Guilty be not a verdict, then you make of the jury and Magna Charta but a mere nose of wax.[/I]
if you don't understand why, I'd suggest you read up on a case known as 'Bushell's Case'
you're peeing into the wind sonny Jim, your suggestions fall on deaf ears, as not one monkey could I give..
I fully understand that some people are happy to do as the bossman says without question.. and I also understand that some would rather not bend over and take one up the juxtaposition quite so obediently..
I'm happy these days to observe from the sidelines and leave the big decisions to fate, as humankind doesn't really seem responsible enough to make the big calls at the moment..
Because you're much bettererer and more clevererer than the rest of humanity. Stupid humans.
why thank you.. I thought it was cos I'm lazy
So is the sanctity of trial by jury, and the acceptance and respect of the decision made by that jury
could you explain miscarriages of justice to me whilst maintain and accepting the sanctity of this process...it is a process and it is not a certainty it leads to the truth or a just decision.
Perhaps you could explain why you are valuing this juries verdict over the Inquest juries verdict of unlawful killing ?
Which is "best" is it just the one you agree with?
We seem to have juries contradicting each other
could you explain miscarriages of justice to me whilst maintain and accepting the sanctity of this process...it is a process and it is not a certainty it leads to the truth or a just decision
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2001/oct/14/jurytrials.humanrights
Did you even read your link?
it was about perverse judgements - that is when juries find " guilty people" innocent...are you suggesting that this has happened here?
It adds nothing to your argument nor answers the question re miscarriages or conflict between juries and the sanctity of trial by jury ...which was what i asked you.
FFS you cannot even google well 🙄
I shall leave this as , frankly, you are not as bright as you think/wish you were and this is futile
that is when juries find " guilty people" innocent
erm, isn't that exactly what you're complaining happened here 🙄
You don't know the motives of the jury, or why they found him innocent - because jury deliberations are secret, so you can't say in [b]any[/b] case why someone who was 'clearly guilty' (as so many of 'the usuals' contend Harwood was) has been cleared.
erm, isn't that exactly what you're complaining happened here
Did i mention perverse decision before you....have a hard think about that one and see if you can work out whether I think this has occurred here or not 🙄
As you are well aware [ unless you did not read your own link] the perverse decision is where a jury choose to not apply the law - ie they know the person did the crime but they refuse to convict them
you can't say in any case why someone who was 'clearly guilty' (as so many of 'the usuals' contend Harwood was) has been cleared
then you would not have been able to post a link citing cases where they have done this 🙄 FFS you silly fool ..desperate and amusing.
What has happened to you of late it was never this easy...has someone taken your log in details over?
welcome to the U K of A. how dare he walk past the riot police with his hands in his pockets.
Zulu-Eleven - Memberbecause jury deliberations are secret, so you can't say in any case why someone who was 'clearly guilty' (as so many of 'the usuals' contend Harwood was) has been cleared.
Who [i]exactly[/i] are these "usuals" that you speak of Zulu-Eleven ?
Explain yourself ....... is chewkw one of them ?
Because he is clearly appalled by the outcome of this case, as shown here :
chewkw - MemberOkay I have tried not to comment on this thread but the outcome really pissed me off ...
Justice in UK is so lame I think the law has been turned up side down.
If the law is no longer able to distinguished the wrongs from the rights then I guess the best way to describe this country is a country heading for sunset.
You try to portray this as an argument of right verses left, and yet it so clearly isn't. No one on this forum could less be described as a bleeding heart leftie than chewkw, he makes even Genghis Khan seem positively liberal. And yet clearly in his opinion justice has not been served with regards to this tragic case.
This has nothing to do with left or right. But you attempt to use as a refuge because you are so bankrupt of intellectual argument.
