Colston Statue

[Jacqueline]

Churchill will be as popular as Edward Colston in less than 50 years maybe sooner.

[Diasi]

Jurors are selected at random     

Yes, we like to think that's the case.

 

[Diasi]

The panel may be but sfaik the defence can reject some but that may only be in serious cases. My question here is why is a case of criminal damage being held before a jury? Surely it should be a matter for magistrates. Hopefull Cass will be able to comment once the sun shows its face in the new world.

Minor offences in which the maximum sentence is higher than that which can be imposed by a Magistrates' Court can be heard in either court.

It could be the case that the CPS expected that a guilty sentence would probably exceed the Magistrates' Court maximum available sentence.

It could be the case that the CPS decided on a Crown Court trial for the safety of local Magistrate

It could be the case that the CPS, for political reasons, decided that a Crown Court trial, before a jury, was the best chance of the defendants getting off & removing the chance of the Bristol riots that would have followed a guilty verdict.

[Cassandra]

We're all up shit creek again ...

[Diasi]

We're all up shit creek again ...

I reckon we have been for quite a while.

[klondike]

Help is at hand though...

[Raven]

Love it.

[Diasi]

And bugger me, I've recently subscribed to Netflix & they've just suggested I might like to watch a programme called Schitt's Creek.

https://www.netflix.com/gb/title/80036165

[Flying Bomb]

Churchill will be as popular as Edward Colston in less than 50 years maybe sooner.

It's quite possible, but for Churchill, these RRRRRholes would be in a concentration camp run by the New SS.

[Wandering Walter]

Evidence not strong enough? They were caught red handed, admitted their guilt, what other proof do you need?

You would have to ask the Jury their word is final, their defence brief must be very persuasive and good at his or her job

[Wandering Walter]

Yes, we like to think that's the case.

How are they selected then and who by?

[Wandering Walter]

Help is at hand though...

[Wandering Walter]

Minor offences in which the maximum sentence is higher than that which can be imposed by a Magistrates' Court can be heard in either court.

It could be the case that the CPS expected that a guilty sentence would probably exceed the Magistrates' Court maximum available sentence.

It could be the case that the CPS decided on a Crown Court trial for the safety of local Magistrate

It could be the case that the CPS, for political reasons, decided that a Crown Court trial, before a jury, was the best chance of the defendants getting off & removing the chance of the Bristol riots that would have followed a guilty verdict.

Cassandra who is highly qualified and very experienced in Criminal Legislation may explain it to you and I in great detail and hopefully will, I as a layman will give you my humble offering and Cassandra can correct both of us if you or I have it wrong

There are certain Offences that can only be heard at a Magistrates Court, there are certain Offences that can only be heard at a Higher Court

There are Offences that can be tried either way either at a Magistrates Court or a Crown Court or higher e.g Central Criminal Court.

The CPS will only bring charges and put offenders before any Court if they think they have a reasonable chance of securing a conviction.

The Magistrate based on the Offence if triable either way dictates at which Court the trial will be held not the CPS.

 

[Cassandra]

The starting grid for Crime is at a Magistrates Court where sentences are 'summary'.  They are also limited to a maximum of 12 months and or fines, community labour etc. Generally they reflect the level of crimes directed to them, motoring, civil disorder etc. However in what we refer to as either way offences, as a hearing develops the bench may then refer some cases to a Crown Court to be tried, or sentenced. The accused at this point is either released on Conditional Bail, or retained in custody prior to either a new trial or sentencing if the punishment is above the lower houses remit. Judiciary here are two or three magistrates, or a Circuit Judge - not a Jury.

A Crown Court hears higher level crime such as Rape or Murder and usually has a Jury and a Judge. Here sentencing ranges from suspended, up to Life terms.

Appeals from this level (and Magistrates Courts) are then heard in the Chancery, Queens Bench and Family Divisions - three layers of the next tier known as 'The High Court' where decisions passed can be overturned, or increased.

Its worth pointing out that in the UK we have what is known as 'A Court of Equity', dating back to the 14th century in origination and 'jurisprudence'. This is where either no Statute law exists to cover a petition, so what is considered to be 'Fair and Reasonable' shall apply. Also where a ruling on proportional division amongst parties over such matters as equity division may be necessary. To be heard here within these instances an originating petition must be passed by the Lord Chancellor's Office.

After that and now finally (since Brexit) comes 'The Supreme Court' which is confined to Appeals on Points of Law only.

Summing up, the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) decides what will be prosecuted and what won't, based upon the strength of evidence bundled. They therefore decide to which level of court such prosecution will be referred. That is apart from petitions to the Chancery division within the categories I have mentioned above.

It is my sincerest hope that the Defendants in the 'Colston Statue' debacle will have their decision overturned in the High Court and upheld in the Supreme Court thereafter.

Lastly its a fact that all Crown Court Jurors are selected from the UK register by the Clerks to the regional location within which the case will be heard.

As Josef Stalin famously once said: "Its not the people who vote that count. Its the people who count the votes that count"

If, as they say over here - you get my drift!

[klondike]

It is my sincerest hope that the Defendants in the 'Colston Statue' debacle will have their decision overturned in the High Court and upheld in the Supreme Court thereafter.

So. A chance that this nonsense can be righted. I wasn't aware that was possible. The verdict returned makes an ass of the jury system itself which is dangerous.