Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Duggan verdict any minute now.
Tottenham holds its breath.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
Lammy's statement http://www.davidlammy.co.uk/statement_on_the_conclusion_of_mark_dug...
Could have said a bit about not kicking off please.
-
Permalink Reply by Narendra Makanji on
-
The jury verdict has all the signs of a whitewash! It's not sustainable.
-
-
Tweet from “@kmflett: been at the High Court for the mark #duggan verdict. Im a supporter of the jury system but the fight for justice goes on”
-
Permalink Reply by Domshaw on
-
A jury is not infallible and a vapid implication that all verdicts should be accepted unquestioningly or be condemned as reactionaries who don't believe in the jury system is not sustainable. Particularly if the evidence presented does not fully represent what happened. For evidence of that, one only has to look at countless examples of jury verdicts and indeed IPCC investigations being exposed long afterwards to have been a farrago of lies, misrepresentation and omission. I worked long ago with the team who made the 'Rough Justice' programmes who all passionately believed in the jury system but knew full well that the evidence presented could be tainted and thus lead to a fatal error in judgment. This inquest verdict and the evidence it was given will be picked apart, hopefully by a dedicated but underfunded legal team or investigative reporter and I suspect we have not heard the last of this.
-
Permalink Reply by BBL on
-
Agree. Birmingham 6, Guildford 4, Tottenham 3, Judith Ward and Carl Bridgwater cases are a few examples of the jury system getting it wrong.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
Well, if you can think of an infallible system to replace the jury I'd be interested to hear it.
-
Permalink Reply by Finsbury Park Ranger on
-
A jury of peers might be an improvement.
-
Permalink Reply by michaela rourke on
-
Whose peers?
-
-
The person who's liberty is in question.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
