tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post5880136063969537832..comments2024-03-15T06:02:30.623+00:00Comments on The Lockerbie Case: Truth sacrificed at the altar of expediencyRobert Blackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03606456028430261555noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-19452444687916884642014-01-24T15:47:48.906+00:002014-01-24T15:47:48.906+00:00I really don't like that barbed comment at the...I really don't like that barbed comment at the end about "life in an independent Scotland". It's life in today's Scotland. Will it be better or worse with independence? I don't know, but if anyone seriously believes that Westminster is a pillar of rectitude and we are all safe under its benevolent rule, I'd like to know what they're smoking.<br /><br />Kenny MacAskill is one man, who has been in his present job too long. An independent Scotland will have elections every few years just like any other normal democracy. The big difference is Scots will get what they vote for, instead of what the South-East of England votes for.<br /><br />To paraphrase something said to someone who was criticising Salmond. "Kenny MacAskill is mortal. Scotland is immortal." The referendum is about far more than one politician or even one political party. It's about taking control and acquiring the power to boot out complacent and corrupt politicians and lawyers. Among other things.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-33881112147891267682014-01-21T23:07:40.618+00:002014-01-21T23:07:40.618+00:00If somebody should say 'Who is this non-Scot w...If somebody should say 'Who is this non-Scot who thinks he has any idea about what would be good for Scottish justice?', I'd understand it.<br /><br />In fact, I am sure that if Iain McKie believes that keeping up the corroboration-thing is the best way to minimize Scottish injustice, it is probably right. He has seen it all, on nearest hold, from its ugliest side.<br /><br />But not because the idea is right. It isn't. Applying artificial constructs (with out-of-necessity chosen ad-hoc exceptions (with historically uncertain performance)) would usually not help justice.<br /><br />In science we see no equivalent construction to determine conclusions or to reach scientific consensus. OK, law is not science, but it would like to be, and pretends to be, so let's not complicate matters. The more rules, the more discussions to get lost in.<br /><br />Corroboration neither saved Shirley nor Megrahi, did it?<br /><br />Keeping it up may be the right thing to do, what do I know - but it is symptomatic treatment, only justified when the underlying disease can be cured.<br /><br />- - -<br /><br />Now, somebody might say 'Hey, again you don't know what you are talking about! Don't get the idea that all judges in Scotland are as poor as the three Zeist guys.'<br /><br />If so, where are the statements, the writings, the letters? Pro or contra Megrahis conviction? Pro or contra other cases you have had over time?<br /><br />I believe that among no other professionals you would see such a bunch of passive yes-sayers. In the army, maybe, but they can at least claim it is their job. <br /><br />One guy speaking up would be fired. Ten guys would change the system, for the benefit of all. <br /><br />But they are not there. Exceptions are rare. Here's one:<br />http://normanfinkelstein.com/2013/it-would-seem-writes-judge-harhoff-that-the-military-establishment-in-leading-states-such-as-israel-and-the-us-felt-that-the-tribunal-was-getting-too-close-to-top-ranking-military-commands/SMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13272238187226269250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-34073330454205836282014-01-20T20:47:57.423+00:002014-01-20T20:47:57.423+00:00I forgot to bring the link to an article that came...I forgot to bring the link to an article that came up when learning about your 'corroboration'.<br /><br />http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/crime-courts/rape-case-accuser-in-appeal-for-evidence-law-change.23017355<br /><br />This is just an article, but the point is, that evidence, not 'corroboration' is what it is all about.SMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13272238187226269250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-27035058023451772312014-01-20T20:45:39.543+00:002014-01-20T20:45:39.543+00:00"Corroboration"
- "... a unique fea..."Corroboration"<br />- "... a unique feature of Scots criminal law ... the requirement for corroborating evidence means at least two different and independent sources of evidence are required in support of each crucial fact before a defendant can be convicted of a crime...<br /><br />However, testimony from some experts, such as forensic medical examiners or doctors, is accepted by courts on the basis of the expert's report alone.<br />"<br />(Wikipedia)<br /><br />No mystery that this is unique Scottish legal feature. <br /><br />There are single instances of proof which weigh much higher than two corroborating ones. So we patch with 'forensic medical examiners or doctors'. <br /><br />Whenever somebody gives a statement, we will need to evaluate <br />- whether the person is particularly likely or unlikely be wrong<br />- whether the person would have reasons to not give correct information.<br /><br />One good statement can be better than two bad ones.<br /><br />I have scanned the 1st Zeist verdict for the sequence 'corrobo'. Twice only! None of them directly relevant for the verdict for Megrahi. <br /><br />Scotland does not need artificial legal constructions. You have already plenty enough to have your lawyers and judges producing any amount of pages you like. <br /><br />I have seen the two verdicts against a man where two unreliable witnesses was the only thing that directly linked him, the person, to a crime. <br /><br />Could the problem be elsewhere: <br />a legal system, detached from common sense and down-to-earth reality, screwed up top-down by self-sufficient people, political expedience and cameraderie with the police?<br /><br />And so under indirect pressure from female voters' groups that can't see that EVIDENCE is needed in rape cases too? And that this _will_ mean that women at times are raped and the culprit walks free but there is no alternative.<br /><br />Solution: Let's discuss corroboration!<br /><br />Well, that is what it looks like to me.<br /><br />SMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13272238187226269250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-46846858258028668072014-01-20T10:52:28.947+00:002014-01-20T10:52:28.947+00:00Dear Jo,
Good to see you back.
You say: "I...Dear Jo,<br /><br />Good to see you back. <br /><br />You say: "It is said the latter proposal is to aid the (female) victims of rape and other sexual and domestic offences." You are quite right to say that there is still a need to retain corroboration. It is vital. Both Mulholland and Angiolini before him have sought to manipulate public opinion by suggesting that corroboration makes it more difficult to convict and works in favour of the perpetrators thus leaving COPFS and the victims of crime high and dry. Their solution is not to build stronger cases against the accused but to dilute the law via Cadder, the abolition on the prohibition of Double Jeopardy and the further abolition of the need for corroboration in order to acquire soft convictions and deny appeals that could question those convictions. This, of course benefits all the authorities involved: COPS, the government and the police. It will not, however, benefit those who fall victim to the miscarriages of justice resultant from these legislative moves.<br /><br />So, the authorities will be able to bask in increased crime clear up rates based on a legislatively convenient fiction, the victims of crime will feel satisfied that someone, anyone, has been sent down for an offence, and, the potential is that the proportion of innocent people incarcerated will increase relative to that of those who truly dunnit.<br /><br />I am ashamed of Scotland's criminal justice system and the direction it is taking right now.<br /><br />Yours,<br />Robert. Quincey Riddlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09196728122070096913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-24025975863512313962014-01-18T20:37:36.855+00:002014-01-18T20:37:36.855+00:00"As a believer in the principle of independen..."As a believer in the principle of independence, I wonder what the apparent failure of justice minister Kenny MacAskill to listen to the mass of voices raised against him tells us about life in an independent Scotland."<br /><br />The first answer is that we shouldn't assume that in an independent Scotland MacAskill would be Justice Minister. There will still be elections and the SNP could lose power. <br /><br />That said, I understand why you make such points about MacAskill as "Justice" anything given the many things he has done in that role from the "emergency" legislation to address Cadder (into which he threw the re-drawing of the SCCRC's powers) to the abolition of corroboration. <br /><br />It is said the latter proposal is to aid the (female) victims of rape and other sexual and domestic offences. I've paid attention to the arguments. I still would retain the need for corroboration. Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.com