| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy 07:54 - Nov 27 with 670 views | GlasgowBlue |
|  |
| |  |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 16:00 - Dec 2 with 331 views | DJR |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 08:16 - Nov 27 by DJR |
You can never tell with this government, but perhaps this this another area where they are floating an extreme with the intention of falling back on Lord Leveson's more measured restrictions on jury trial.
Whatever the position, this is yet another reason why Lammy would have preferred to remain Foreign Secretary, a job he clearly enjoyed.
Shabana Mahmood got out while the going was good.  [Post edited 27 Nov 8:18]
|
It looks like they went beyond the Leveson proposals but didn't follow through on the more extreme measures leaked.
This is the Law Society's response, and I think the proposals are going to get a rough ride, especially in the Lords.
In a statement, Brett Dixon, the society’s vice president, said:
"Sir Brian Leveson’s recommendations, including two magistrates sitting alongside a judge in the new court, retained an element of lay participation in determining a person’s guilt or innocence. The government’s proposals remove this.
Allowing a single judge, operating in an under resourced system, to decide guilt in a serious and potentially life changing case is a dramatic departure from our shared values.
The government cannot justify stripping away this fundamental right without publishing clear evidence that putting more cases in the hands of a single judge will tackle the horrendous backlogs in our courts.
The Leveson proposals, while an uncomfortable compromise, were understandable given the extensive challenges the criminal justice system faces including unacceptable delays for victims, witnesses and defendants. Going beyond them is not." [Post edited 2 Dec 16:17]
|  | | |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 16:32 - Dec 2 with 281 views | Perublue |
Living currently in a country where there is no jury system for any crime and guilt or not is decided solely by a judge is horrendous on so many levels.
I know that’s not the plan but things become normalised after a while…then what next ? [Post edited 2 Dec 16:46]
|  |
| |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 16:40 - Dec 2 with 260 views | hype313 |
Have to say, expected better of Labour.
So far we've had...
Anti corruption minister found guilty of corruption
Homelessness minister made her tenants homeless
Rayner didn’t pay her stamp duty
Mandelson
Horrendous budget
Reeves CV and letting licence … |  |
| |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 16:43 - Dec 2 with 252 views | OldFart71 |
Lammymentable |  | | |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 17:27 - Dec 2 with 181 views | Trequartista |
He is absolutely hopeless. |  |
| |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 17:37 - Dec 2 with 158 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
He said this 5 years ago. Are people not allowed to change their minds?!
And also, this was before they'd seen the perilous state the Tories had left the justice system in. It's rumoured that Sunak brought the election forward so the next party in power would have to deal with it. They'd literally run out of prison spaces and the Tories did nothing... before handing the mess over to someone else.
The backlog for trials is so bad, Labour are considering bringing this in to try and fix the absolute shambles your lot left. I guess the other option is to kick it down the road like they did? |  |
| |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 17:49 - Dec 2 with 121 views | DJR |
Given the following (from the Guardian), it does seem that something had to be done, but I think I would have stuck to Leveson's proposals.
"The argument of the government and the retired judge Brian Leveson, who was commissioned to come up with proposals to reform the justice system, is that a record backlog in the courts is failing victims, witnesses and defendants.
There are currently almost 80,000 cases waiting to be completed in the crown courts and Lammy has warned that the figure will rise to more than 100,000 without radical reform. It is a common refrain that justice delayed is justice denied, and the waiting times have led to victims and witnesses increasingly deciding not to participate in trials. The quality of evidence they give can also be affected.
Some people charged with serious crimes are being given trial dates in 2029 or 2030. In the meantime, they could be held in jail awaiting trial, only to be later acquitted.
Particular concerns have been raised in relation to rape cases, given the government’s plans to tackle violence against women and girls."
Of course it's easy for the Tories to rail against the proposals but they were in power when the backlog (which pre-dates. but was made worse by, Covid) arose. [Post edited 2 Dec 17:50]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 17:54 - Dec 2 with 104 views | reusersfreekicks |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 17:49 - Dec 2 by DJR |
Given the following (from the Guardian), it does seem that something had to be done, but I think I would have stuck to Leveson's proposals.
"The argument of the government and the retired judge Brian Leveson, who was commissioned to come up with proposals to reform the justice system, is that a record backlog in the courts is failing victims, witnesses and defendants.
There are currently almost 80,000 cases waiting to be completed in the crown courts and Lammy has warned that the figure will rise to more than 100,000 without radical reform. It is a common refrain that justice delayed is justice denied, and the waiting times have led to victims and witnesses increasingly deciding not to participate in trials. The quality of evidence they give can also be affected.
Some people charged with serious crimes are being given trial dates in 2029 or 2030. In the meantime, they could be held in jail awaiting trial, only to be later acquitted.
Particular concerns have been raised in relation to rape cases, given the government’s plans to tackle violence against women and girls."
Of course it's easy for the Tories to rail against the proposals but they were in power when the backlog (which pre-dates. but was made worse by, Covid) arose. [Post edited 2 Dec 17:50]
|
Yep easy to rail against this but something has to happen
And there is no money to throw at it
Do wonder what that utter wonker Jenrick would do?
To hear a trump wannabe like him go on a bout individual rights is ridiculous |  | | |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 18:03 - Dec 2 with 81 views | vapour_trail |
| David Lammy needs to listen to David Lammy on 17:49 - Dec 2 by DJR |
Given the following (from the Guardian), it does seem that something had to be done, but I think I would have stuck to Leveson's proposals.
"The argument of the government and the retired judge Brian Leveson, who was commissioned to come up with proposals to reform the justice system, is that a record backlog in the courts is failing victims, witnesses and defendants.
There are currently almost 80,000 cases waiting to be completed in the crown courts and Lammy has warned that the figure will rise to more than 100,000 without radical reform. It is a common refrain that justice delayed is justice denied, and the waiting times have led to victims and witnesses increasingly deciding not to participate in trials. The quality of evidence they give can also be affected.
Some people charged with serious crimes are being given trial dates in 2029 or 2030. In the meantime, they could be held in jail awaiting trial, only to be later acquitted.
Particular concerns have been raised in relation to rape cases, given the government’s plans to tackle violence against women and girls."
Of course it's easy for the Tories to rail against the proposals but they were in power when the backlog (which pre-dates. but was made worse by, Covid) arose. [Post edited 2 Dec 17:50]
|
I do not support the move by Lammy, however I have worked on a case of accused sexual assault against a child that is now likely to take four and a half years from charges being made to court date. It has already been delayed three times.
System is really not working.
It is dreadful for the victim. It’s also dreadful for the accused.
I don’t know what the answer is, so this is a bit of a pointless post. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
