WTF Moment of the week

The article reads to me like it has been written as a way of inciting people, rather than a genuine expression of views. You know, the sort of arsegravy you get from Littlejohn or Galloway.

Society has moved towards acting on the will of the people, rather than away from it. We now have interactive TV, every talent show is decided by public votes, we hold governments and those in power accountable by petition, press and pressure never more regularly seen.

Juries offer a way of common sense (a thing often said to be absent from the legal profession) being applied and, on the whole, it is generally accepted that juries come to a reasonable conclusion. That is all that is required. In practice, no one expects the right answer every time, but reasonable outcomes are essential to project the integrity of the legal process.

Peer review is a wonderful principle by which to judge our actions. That someone struggled with "reasonable doubt" is neither entirely surprising nor an indication that a process available for centuries is on the wain. People haven't suddenly become idiots.

All a jury must do is decide on the facts presented whether they are sure that person did that crime. If they aren't, the person walks. Society oughtn't punish unless it is confident of guilt. The jurors aren't held to account by their reasoning like judges are. They aren't concerned about their political image, their own aspirations, their previous decisions and so on. They are truly independent, with there being as many as 12 of them to dilute any impurities further.

The argument that the barristers not doing a good enough job is a reason to disband juries is bananas. We all get professionals in to do jobs for us. If they don't do the job well enough, we can hold them to account. There is also an appeals process if a mistake in law or fact arose.

Ms Pryce will likely face a re-trial, as the nature of the offence and the public interest will likely demand it.

The implication that justice can't have been done because the jury was not satisfied that Ms Pryce was guilty is a misunderstanding of the process, IMO.