Thread 38 Starmer: Tax your Hamster

[DuncinToffee]

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5440759-thread-37-starmer-pinko-commie-slimeball?page=1

Political and general discussion with bonus recipes

Taxes optional but greatly appreciated

It will be for all except most serious crimes such as rape, murder and manslaughter.

Personally, a jury in a rape trial makes me uncomfortable

Notwithstanding the horrific attitudes that are demonstrated towards women in rape trials by the judiciary and the jury, trials can be extremely traumatising for jurors.

Out of interest bombastix if this is your line in the sand re a Labour vote, where are you heading?

I feel like I have to keep begrudgingly moving my line.

Removing the 2 child benefit cap and raising the minimum wage sound positive moves to me.

I’d definitely be more concerned nowadays about conscious or unconscious bias in jury trials.

I wish we had a system whereby evidence leads the decision and qualified judges make a decision based on it. Expanding the CPS and CJS.

What’s the point of an 8 month jury trial for people who may have bias, not understand the evidence etc.

I don’t think jury trials are the be all or end all gold standard. However I’m also concerned about the rash scrapping the system to cost save and clear a back log without a better system to replace it to support the lower cost and time.

The issue is using the judiciary where the expectation in the UK is that you will be going to prison. I would not, for myself, want a judge to be the person who decided I was going to prison. That is where this disgusting idea will land where people are facing their liberty being removed for years and years.

The UK has the highest prison population in Western Europe. The idea is that if you don’t hear the door clang behind you after conviction then you are let off. What a grim prescription for a problem of funding. More prisons. Less accountability via juries.

I particularly disliked the weasel line of “no right to jury trial” in his memo.

I don’t know where my vote goes.

I think the original Leveson proposals probably struck the right balance - judge, 2 mags, max sentence of 3 years.

But I go back to my comments a few days ago - we aren’t prepared to find the justice system more than it has been. Not to the extent of opening more courts to beat the backlog.
Without a concerted effort to extend numbers of sitting days the backlog isn’t going anywhere.

My concern will be what happens if a party gets in that wants to politicise appointments. Because then we really are fucked.

The one I know was child abuse. Toddler left brain damaged, both parents charged. Mother found guilty on a majority verdict as she was"clearly a slag", father not guilty as "poor bugger had to put up with the cow". Not totally convinced about the role of juries.

A jury is a little parliament. It is the final backstop to bad laws. It's where we can exercise our conscience.

https://corkerbinning.com/lord-devlins-lamp-of-freedom-covid19-jury-trial/

“The first object of any tyrant in Whitehall would be to make parliament utterly subservient to his will; and the next to overthrow or diminish the right to trial by jury, for no tyrant could afford to leave a subject’s freedom in the hands of 12 of his countrymen.”

Cold War Steve 😂

😆

We've had a somewhat negative jury experience too with a young family member - they are just 'not very bright' and have some frankly weird ideas about how the world works - IMO they should have been excused jury service

I think people misunderstand why we have juries and where they come from. They are not a claim to perfect justice. They are our stake in the system that can deprive us of our liberty. A system that is already the preserve of the wealthy.

You can't be a Brexiteer and happy with abolishing juries I would have thought.

No juries are not perfect justice. But then neither are judges. But of course, if you want a higher conviction rate, a highly prejudicial test for a case applied by lawyers, judged by lawyers of ordinary people, then this is it.

For my part, jury trial makes the best of the “beyond reasonable doubt” that requires conviction. It means that unless 12 people (or a majority) really are sure, then that person is acquitted. End. That is what I mean by liberal. It doesn’t allow the prejudice of one judge to have the decision as judge, jury and executioner (sentenced). We used to think that was a bad idea. It still is, imo. You can look at the Diplock courts (now thankfully gone) in NI for some of the drawbacks.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/starmer-apologises-to-headteacher-after-doing-6-7-dance-in-primary-school-5HjdNQ4_2/

Firget about Nathan Gill. More importantly Keir Starmer made some kids do the 6-7 dance in school.

I think this is a good summary of the original proposal and more importantly the failures in the existing system.

It’s another perfect storm of failures to invest in multiple areas (staff, estate, tech) over a very long period.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/leveson-review-courts

But Keir has no sense of humour ☺️

That actually made me warm to him a little.

Quite mischievous

It is the big day! I am travelling most of today so will check in later today to see if MN and the UK has survived the budget. Hope the thread remains peaceful.❤️

You haven't addressed the fact though that many highly liberal countries (for example, in Scandinavia) don't have juries.

I'm working most of the day. I expect it to be carnage on MN by this evening.

I'm travelling back as well. Late tax - Anne Hathaway's garden.

Obviously today is the end of life as we know it. By the time I tune back in society will have collapsed.