Discussion arising from 2007-04-20 Double jeopardy principle in dock - Australian
Sounds entirely reasonable to me that, after either acquittal or conviction, the appearance of substantial new evidence should allow a reconsideration of the judgement. The fundamental principle should be that the facts should influence the evaluation of the jury and/or judges. If substantial new facts become available, then the judgement may be different. Surely, the same principles that determine whether a judge allows a reconsideration of a conviction could be used for the reconsideration of an acquittal.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," 2 says English jurist William Blackstone.
The story is told of a Chinese law professor, who was listening to a British lawyer explain that Britons were so enlightened, they believed it was better that ninety-nine guilty men go free than that one innocent man be executed. The Chinese professor thought for a second and asked, "Better for whom?"
See wonderful article on the number of guilty various people would let of.... the article asserts that current value is 59.72 ... http://digbyreferences.blogspot.com/2008/12/n-guilty-men.html
Stephen Digby
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment or Send a Message
You can use this form to send a message OR make a comment as your contribution is NOT published automatically, but sent to Stephen for
consideration.
You can select "anonymous" from the drop down menu below if you do not have a google account.