nanny state, more legislation & it doesn't cover jet skis !

Bergman

New member
Joined
27 Nov 2002
Messages
3,787
Visit site
Re: Actually less legislation

Thank you sir

If I may close the point:

Trials are held in open court so that justice can be seen to be done. So that the accused can face his accusers, answer the accusation and defend himself before a jury.

It isn't an excuse for ill informed second guessing of the outcome - the question of guilt is for the jury and the jury alone.
 

Bergman

New member
Joined
27 Nov 2002
Messages
3,787
Visit site
Re: Actually less legislation

If Rick will forgive me jumping in:

There is a specific offence of causing death by dangerous driving. I have never heard of motoring related deaths causing a charge of manslaughter, but I guess it is possible.

If the victim was drunk I think it would be argued that he contributed to his own misfortune which would make it unlikely for a manslaughter charge to stick - or indeed be tried in the first place.

These are purely a laymans opinion - I am not a lawyer.
 

Cruiser2B

Active member
Joined
3 Nov 2005
Messages
2,424
Location
Canada
Visit site
Re: Actually less legislation

For someone who emphatically distrusts the government, you have an awful lot of faith in the judiciary. So you're saying it's okay to question the creation of a law, but verboten to comment on its application?
 

Bergman

New member
Joined
27 Nov 2002
Messages
3,787
Visit site
Re: Actually less legislation

There is absolutely no contradiction in this position.

In a constitutional monarch such as the UK the judiciary are not accountable to government they are solely accountable to the Crown. The government cannot sack a judge. The whole basis of the freedom that we enjoy, despite Blairs best efforts, lies with the independance of the judiciary.

They have to apply law as made by parliament when it is enacted by both houses of parliament and signed by Her Majesty. (there are exceptions to this) but the judiciary hold the rule of law not government.

Even the police force, all of whom swear an oath do so to the sovereign NOT the PM, and not to the government.

Given this I am sure that you will agree my position is entirely rational.

Would have thought as a Canadian you would appreciate this.
 
Top