Yes, of course the eight-year-old in Hull who could not be charged for his part in robbing a charity shop is himself a victim. But so what?
The point of the Union almost escapes even me when I realise that, even after three hundred years, Scots have never acquired the automatic right to trial by jury as it applies in England, and have always been subject to that late aberration (which cannot be reversed too soon) in England of conviction where there is reasonable doubt, i.e., by a majority verdict.
And the point of the Union almost escapes even me when I realise that, even after three hundred years, the actual or potential victims of delinquent children in Scotland have two years more of protection than they have in England.
I am not suggesting sending eight-year-olds to prison. That does not happen now in Scotland. But nor does letting them off, as it were, Scot free. And nor should that happen here, either.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The way the jury thing worked is for historic reasons. The prosecution service has been traditionally independent of the police in Scotland.
ReplyDeleteThat has until fairly recently the case in England. The decision to prosecute lay traditionally in England with the police, not an independent prosecution service.
Remember trial by jury is guaranteed in the Magna Carta - a document of little legal force in Scotland. The Declaration of Arbroath, the National Covenant and the Claim of Right - yes. Magna Carta - no.
By the way there is no trial by jury on Guernsey. The Baliff sits with a bunch of glorified magistrates (jurats - many of whom are lawyers by trade).
Jersey there is a jury at an Assize.
"The way the jury thing worked is for historic reasons"
ReplyDeleteThat's not an excuse. And the blame lies squarely with nearly three hundred years of Westminster Parliaments.
"The decision to prosecute lay traditionally in England with the police, not an independent prosecution service"
Something else where Scotland should have followed the English route rather than, as also happened with majority verdicts, England following the oligarchical Scottish route. Again, successive MPs and pers are to blame.
"Magna Carta - a document of little legal force in Scotland"
A document of little or no legal force in England, either. But you have juries, which is the point. As it is here, in fact.
"By the way there is no trial by jury on Guernsey. The Baliff sits with a bunch of glorified magistrates (jurats - many of whom are lawyers by trade)"
English stipendiary magistrates also have to be lawyers, and sit on their own, even though it is a Magistrates' Court. Lord Denning predicted all sorts of problems when this was first proposed, and he has been proved right. Away with them.
It is beyond me why there couldn't be juries on Guernsey. There are both juries and non-stipendiary benches of three magistrates on Saint Helena, a much smaller and more remote place. It all works perfectly well.
"Jersey there is a jury at an Assize"
Good for Jersey.