We're considering closing this forum and would appreciate your thoughts, memories, comments etc, and especially any offers of help if you'd like the forum to stay running.
You may read the posts but if you wish to post yourself, then you need to register. This is simple and you just need a valid email address.
Register Here
We look forward to seeing you posting soon!
If you have already registered, but have forgotten your password, please click here to get it reset.
Originally posted by littlemoo@16th March 2005 - 02:39 PM Do MP's have to reply to a faxed letter? I know they have to reply to a written and posted one from someone in their own constituency.
~Jo
hi all just read through the threads as i have been in hospital .... wow a lot has been on since i was last on here, (quick question) as i can't sit here very long still vety sore everyone seems to be writing about the jury service but has anyone done service? i myself have and took it very very seriously because i knew peoples lives were at stake, but like i said in a previous post most that were sat on jury were a waste of space i wont go into detail, there have been a lot of very good points made i will reread and gather my thoughts its been a lot to take in so 4 now take care all x
Ok peeps, version two of the letter and distribution list are ready for the debate to continue.
The paragraphs are either lettered or numbered. Paragraphs A and B are opening paragraphs, the rest are numbered. Please state which paragraph your reply relates to when posting comments.
The new version of the letter is here
I've added the suggestions proposed by Towermouse, and also the www.faxyourmp.com site, but the list is still a little thin on the ground. Could I ask people to have a think about other recipiants too?
My own personal opinion and what I consider would be the cheapest and easiest to implement would be for all jury room discussions to be video taped.
If there was any concern as to the verdict these tapes could be made available to both prosecution and defence lawyers for assessment as to whether the jury acted in a proper manner.
This would ensure participation of all jurors and possible prevent domineering personalities from taking over and also ensure a proper deliberation of evidence heard.
These tapes could also provide valuable information for future necessary changes or re-evaluation of the jury system.
Originally posted by diana_holbourn@9th March 2005 - 11:28 AM OK. I have a bit to say. I hope you don't think I'm being overly-critical. This isn't my intention.
Making my points in chronological order rather than in order of seriousness:
Firstly, you say, "Broadcaster Forum is an internet discussion group ...".
It might be more grammatically neat to call it "The Broadcaster Forum".
ps. I'm sure that typographical errors in the draft letter will be sorted before the final letter is produced, as some input seems to be more concerned with these than the real issues.
Most agree that changes are necessary in the interests of justice....at present it is estrimated that there are around 5,000 innocent people in UK prisons.
Hi, I'm an ex-probation officer with 20 years experience - leaving the service because of disillusionment with the jury system. I think your letter is great, and I really like the idea of juries being viodeotaped - this would seem to preclude the need for other checks to be made. I just didn't understand paragraph 5:
"In the case of offences that are known to be alleged falsely, both the prosecution and defence should have the opportunity to address the jury, before any evidence is heard, to draw the attention of jurors to the problems associated with such cases. Such cases should include rape, sexual assault and all historical allegations."
If the Offences are known to be alleged falsely, why are they being heard in Court? Am I being a bit dense?!
I'm currently trying to locate psychological studies on juries (or anyone for that matter! being unable to differentiate id individuals are telling the truth or lies, but my psychologist pall is away at the moment - does anyone have any info? I'm sure there is some, but can't locate it on the internet - will try and take a trip to the library in a few weeks. This might be relevant for this letter reference "hard" and "soft" evidence (hard being records and forensic evidence, soft being witness evidence)
I wonder if you'd heard that the Home Office have apparently set up a study on the inquisitorial v adversiaral system? - "being carried out by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law" - information from MOJUK. Could we include them in the circulation list, also MOJUK, Independent, Times, and Shadow Home Secretary (if he gets re-elected!
There is also a whole load of MP's interested in the issue of False Allegations - list issued by AAFAA (Action Against False Allegations of Abuse) - would these be appropriate to include?
Originally posted by Guest@28th March 2005 - 06:51 AM I wonder if you'd heard that the Home Office have apparently set up a study on the inquisitorial v adversiaral system? - "being carried out by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law" - information from MOJUK. Could we include them in the circulation list, also MOJUK, Independent, Times, and Shadow Home Secretary (if he gets re-elected!
There is also a whole load of MP's interested in the issue of False Allegations - list issued by AAFAA (Action Against False Allegations of Abuse) - would these be appropriate to include?
I looked at the MOJUK site (http://www.mojuk.org.uk/) but I couldn't find any contact details at all - no email or postal address. I may have been being blind, but do you know how to get in touch with them?
Also, I looked at the Home office site (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/), and the site of The British Institute of International and Comparative Law (http://www.biicl.org/) but could not find anything about the report. Would you be able to provide some more details? It sounds very interesting but I can't find much out about it.
The list on the AAFAA site sounds ideal, although the site is down at the moment so I can't check it.
I have a hard copy of the AAFAA list of MP's which I could post to Val as I know him (he's helped me a lot!, and you if you have a PO Box no. Don't know if all the MP's will get re-elected tho'!
The comment about the study being instigated by the Home Office was at the end of an email from MOJUK with a write up by Charles Hanson entitled "Juries - Time to Get Rid of Them", but this end bit does not appear to have been written by him. The end part is entitled 'Inquisitorial system' v 'Adversarial system', and has this paragraph:
"A new study that the Home Office has set up, at the behest of Ludovic Kennedy, being carried out by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law, to compare our 'adversarial system' against the European 'inquisitorial system'."
I don't agree, by the way, that its "time to get rid of juries" - I think Val is right when he says other systems are even more vulnerable to abuse, but the email had some interesting points.
I can send you the complete email if you can give me your address. I also need to register with this site! - when I have a bit more time...
Originally posted by Webmaster@29th March 2005 - 06:44 PM I looked at the MOJUK site (http://www.mojuk.org.uk/) but I couldn't find any contact details at all - no email or postal address. I may have been being blind, but do you know how to get in touch with them?
hi all i can honestly say untill my son got accused i didn't realise how much people actualy falsley accused others, because my family have never had any dealings with the police and we don't bother with news papers i never knew how rife this was, after reading 100s of stories i find it really upsetting, these pages on the sight that you sent through is just unbeleivable it just goes to show how much is really going on i'm so shocked, the law needs to be changed very quickly this is outragouse x
yep, its a problem all right. Thats what the idea of the letter about jury service is all about. If we can get that right we can move onto other areas.
Its only by putting pressure on politicians, by pointing out such areas that need reform that we can ever change things, short or a full scale revolt.
If you want to accelerate this change, and I assume that you do use the "email"button and send the letter page to as many people you know that could add constructive comments and ask them to join in.
Originally posted by val lavender@30th March 2005 - 09:13 PM If you want to accelerate this change, and I assume that you do use the "email"button and send the letter page to as many people you know that could add constructive comments and ask them to join in.
The more people we get onto this the better.
Regards
To those who have been asking, Val is talking about the function that this forum has, where you can get the forum to email someone a link to this thread. Feel free to try it, emailing yourself, so you can see what arrives!
In the top right corner of the very first post in this thread (from me!, there is a link entitled "Email this topic". Click this, and you wil be given a screen where you can enter an email address, and can alter the subject and message content if you wish. Then just press send and they will have email!
Please do send links to this thread, or indeed any other thread you think people may be interested in - the more people we have contributing to the forum, the better!
Regarding the AAFAA (Action Against False Allegations of Abuse) group - they have closed down quite a while ago and their website has now been taken fully offline.
However, the internet is a wonderful place, and you can still read the latest version of their site that was live, here: Action Against False Allegations of Abuse - .
everyone seems to be writing about the jury service but has anyone done service? i myself have and took it very very seriously because i knew peoples lives were at stake, but like i said in a previous post most that were sat on jury were a waste of space i wont go into detail, there have been a lot of very good points made i will reread and gather my thoughts its been a lot to take in 
so 4 now take care all x
being unable to differentiate id individuals are telling the truth or lies, but my psychologist pall is away at the moment - does anyone have any info? I'm sure there is some, but can't locate it on the internet - will try and take a trip to the library in a few weeks. This might be relevant for this letter reference "hard" and "soft" evidence (hard being records and forensic evidence, soft being witness evidence)
Tweet
Comment