andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2018-10-16 12:00 pm

Interesting Links for 16-10-2018

Not Proven verdict

[personal profile] nojay 2018-10-16 12:27 pm (UTC)(link)
I didn't really want to talk about this but...

I was on a jury recently at the High Court in Edinburgh in a case about rape among other things. We ended up acquitting the defendant in the actual rape charges but we brought back "not proven" verdicts in several sexual assault charges.

The accusers in the sexual assault charges were credible in the witness box but they weren't credible enough to convict according to the rules of evidence. The Crown relied on a series of interlocking and supporting statements of evidence from several people and there was a relationship problem with one of them which meant we couldn't in all honesty convict the person on any of those charges.

My personal opinion was that the person was guilty of the sexual offences charges but that didn't count, not in court. The "not proven" verdict meant they walked free but it showed the jury's belief that there was something to the charges.

As an aside the rape charges fell apart as soon as we heard all the evidence. Day 1 we were ready to lock them up and throw away the key. By day 5 none of the fifteen people in the jury room thought the rape charges were credible, and that's after being exposed to the defence's testimony which did not make the defendant look good at all.
Edited (Fixing capitalisation) 2018-10-16 12:27 (UTC)
danieldwilliam: (Default)

Re: Not Proven verdict

[personal profile] danieldwilliam 2018-10-17 03:20 pm (UTC)(link)
I well remember being introduced to the not proven verdict at law school

"When there is not enough evidence to convict but the words "Not Guilty" stick in your throat" is I think the appropriate dictum from the leading case.