5 Responses to Justice Secretary repairs one error with Police Scotland and stands to make a worse one – with Scots law

  1. If ever I needed proof that the SNP are not fit to govern an independent Scotland, this was it.

    And before the Nationalists cry out that the SNP could be voted, out, I’ll accept that there are no other parties fit to govern an Indpendent Scotland either.

    this so-called Justice secretary should be given his marching orders before he destroys the Scottish Legal system,

    Sadly there is no opposition capable of forcing him out.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

    • And his decision to release Megrahi?
      What other government would have had the courage to make this decision and carry it out knowing the repercussions from those we in the UK continually try to appease across the Atlantic?
      My admiration for Kenny MacAskill during and after this increased hugely.
      Btw Jamie, the full story has not been reported in Newsroom’s article. Before castigating him and this government go and find another news website to try and corroborate Newsie’s evidence of MacAskill’s failings.
      You might struggle.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6

  2. It may be worth mentioning that Kenny MacAskill also plans to introduce safeguards such as upping the number of jurors required to return a majority guilty verdict.
    If a jury had returned a majority guilty verdict then two-thirds of that jury would have had to have been in favour of a guilty verdict, any less then its not guilty.
    My understanding from other sources is that the not proven verdict will still be available to jury’s but must be returned with a majority verdict, two thirds of the jury at least.
    As an example, if there are fifteen in a jury then normally eight from the fifteen would have been required to return a guilty verdict. Scotland’s justice secretary now proposes ten from the fifteen jurors are required (2/3 of 15)
    In my opinion strengthening the chance of a correct verdict.
    I also gather the Bill is to include an increase of the maximum term for anyone found to be carrying a knife from four to five years.
    Also, strengthening court powers to aid sentencing for those committing crimes whilst on early release, anyone object to these?
    If my understanding of these proposals and the safeguards are correct then why no mention of them in your otherwise interesting article Newsie?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5

  3. i’m puzzled – I knew about most of these changes long before they were documented in this article and having discussed with friends who will have to work with the decisions of this arrogant government (yes, I say arrogant for that is how I perceive them now), I have little faith that they are acting for th greater good.

    The fact that ‘safeguards’ have to be introduced to mitigate the effects proves that the decision is fundamentally flawed.

    How long before these ‘safeguards’ become too costly and they make cuts, like they did with the court service?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

  4. Increasing the size of the majority required to return a guilty verdict, will have no effect if the evidence was false, or flawed, from the outset.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.