The British legal system needs another loophole to help defendants avoid conviction like it needs a hole in the head.

 

Yet that is what Judge Jamie Tabor has created after halting a trial on the grounds that the jury might give too much credence to the evidence of the principal prosecution witness.

 

Denise Dawson suffered an extremely nasty attack from the gang of youths. She picked out Liam Perks as one of the gang at a police ID parade.

 

Judge Tabor acknowledged that she showed “courage, clarity of thought and was undoubtedly honest”. But he ruled that her upstanding nature meant the jury might be tempted to give undue weight to her identification of Perks.

 

While Mrs Dawson’s good character was absurdly held to disable her as a witness, the jury was not allowed to know about the bad character of Perks – he is awaiting sentence after having admitted other offences.

 

Judge Tabor is right to think jurors are likely to give more weight to the dishonest ones. What is amazing is that he should wish to eliminate that prospect.

 

Poor Mrs Dawson suffered a broken nose at the hands of a gang of thugs. But she recently received a kick in the teeth from the judiciary. 

 

Source: Sunday Express

 

Surely you should tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God in Court. Or in this case tell a few lies and the defendent will stand a better chance?

Was the Sunday Express reporter in court? I doubt it. Until I hear or read a reliable report from someone who can report the judge's full remarks, I will continue to have no opinion on this.

Was the Sunday Express reporter in court? I doubt it. Until I hear or read a reliable report from someone who can report the judge's full remarks, I will continue to have no opinion on this.

 

I really cant see how the judiciary can possibly put any kind of spin on this that actually makes any sense at all.... How can the good character of someone be held to be prejudicial in a court case.....? Should we now all go out and be a bit "naughty" so perhaps if summat bad happens to us then we'll be taken more seriously if the case makes it to court....? What a ridiculous notion....

 

Frankly, I wonder just why the fukk some Judges are allowed to be on the bench.... It's stupid Judges like this one who risk the integrity and independence of the system of justice in this country.... I'm in favour of an independent judiciary, it's important that the Justice system is seen to be apart from the political process, but independence should not mean that we should tolerate stupidity and outlandish judgements such as this.... Judges should not be accountable to politicians, but they should be accountable to the public, and they should explain their decisions on the record.....

its been on the news, it was reported last week .... its true, the mugger wouldnt get a fair trial because he was a mugger and denises testimony was 'too believable'!!!! ffs... the police were moaning about it because a criminal got off, wasting polices time in capturing a guilty person. it undermines the police. its fukking ludicrous..

the police were moaning about it because a criminal got off, wasting polices time in capturing a guilty person.

 

Yes, because clearly the Police's time should be better spent harrassing motorists, anti-war demonstrators and trumping up charges against opposition MPs doing their jobs instead of actually CATCHING CRIMINALS innit.....? :rolleyes:

 

The Police dont need JUDGES to undermine them, they're doing a bang-up job of that themselves..... :lol:

I really cant see how the judiciary can possibly put any kind of spin on this that actually makes any sense at all.... How can the good character of someone be held to be prejudicial in a court case.....? Should we now all go out and be a bit "naughty" so perhaps if summat bad happens to us then we'll be taken more seriously if the case makes it to court....? What a ridiculous notion....

 

Frankly, I wonder just why the fukk some Judges are allowed to be on the bench.... It's stupid Judges like this one who risk the integrity and independence of the system of justice in this country.... I'm in favour of an independent judiciary, it's important that the Justice system is seen to be apart from the political process, but independence should not mean that we should tolerate stupidity and outlandish judgements such as this.... Judges should not be accountable to politicians, but they should be accountable to the public, and they should explain their decisions on the record.....

You've missed the point. Have you seen a reliable report from someone who was actually in court? Did they report the judge's remarks in full or did they just paraphrase one small part of it? You are usually one of the most cynical posters when it comes to reports in the Tory press. Why are you so ready to believe a report in the Sunday Distress?

This was also reported on the BBC & ITV news last week as well, not just in the Daily Express.

This was also reported on the BBC & ITV news last week as well, not just in the Daily Express.

 

BBC, ITV and C4 news.... And I believe Newsnight went pretty in-depth also...... So, it's far from being a case of just one right wing Tabloid... There's an issue here that needs to be addressed - ie, of some Judges being clearly ineffective in their job of protecting the public from criminals.....This is certainly not the first time something like this has happened.... In fact, it's not even the first time for this particular Judge.... <_<

 

But the other reports presumably used the same source as the Sunday Express, presumably someone involved with the case. Perhaps (and, again, I'm guessing because I wasn't in court either) the judge thought her evidence was unreliable but would be believed because of her "upstanding nature".

But the other reports presumably used the same source as the Sunday Express, presumably someone involved with the case. Perhaps (and, again, I'm guessing because I wasn't in court either) the judge thought her evidence was unreliable but would be believed because of her "upstanding nature".

 

And presumably this same judge who let a peadophile off the hook because he said his victim "probably enjoyed it" means that an 11 year old girl somehow consented in her rape.... As if she actually legally could.... <_< Mate, sometimes people are just sh!t at their jobs and need sacking...... For OUR good..... :rolleyes:

 

How can a victim of a crime who makes a clear identification to the Police be "unreliable" FFS... You really are just clutching at straws, you usually make good arguments, but you are so wide of the mark here, that you're aiming at a completely different target, how on earth can you defend a quite clearly incompetent Judge who appears to hold the intelligence of the general public in such contempt that he actually thinks we'll buy into his bullsh!t reasoning...? This 'judgement' quite clearly sends out the entirely wrong message that it does not pay in the eyes of the law to be an honest, upstanding citizen.... Ridiculous, we'd might as well all go out and commit crimes then..... :rolleyes: