From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve and all CyberShooters,
We have recently witnessed what appears to be a total perversion of
Justice.
In spite of the fact that he was patently outnumbered, effectively
attacked in his own dwelling house - at night, with absolutely no
prospect whatsoever of rescue or defence by his local police, a man now
faces life imprisonment - for "Murder".
Much of the reported "summing up" by the Crown Prosecution was patently
aimed more at the Press than the jury - going for "Sound-Bites" ? -
highly emotionally charged, but with questionable relevance to either
the facts leading up to the incident or "Justice" being seen to be
served. I would love to see the full Court transcript.
Little positive can be said for the so-called "Twelve Good Men and True"
- public opinion is now judging their performance and verdict, and in my
view finding it alarmingly perverse. The only justified - and legal -
pressure on any juror, is one of obligation - to honesty and truth.
Public allegations have now been made that this was not the sole
pressure placed on these jurors - let us all pray that the
investigations into these allegations are more thorough and less
politically motivated than the activities we have so far witnessed.
Some - perhaps less trusting of "authority" than others - will have
noted that this public demeaning of the jury system comes rather
providentially at a time when our dear Home Secretary and his mandarins
are putting forward the concept of "doing away with the right to trial
by jury " - all too convenient - don't you agree ?
Not being one to wish harm on my fellow man, I must however point out
that all the burglars were present of their own volition - committing a
violent offence during the darkest hours - having chosen a remote and
isolated dwelling for their illegal attentions. For the relatives of the
youngest to claim that he had the right to being treated by the judicial
system rather than the man he confronted is very lame. He had already
partaken of that "right" on numerous occasions and had not learned.
That loss is his and theirs - but not one which any other householder
should be held liable for - he had his chances but sadly chose to remain
an "outlaw".
One final word - or so - I do strongly believe that the police officer
who read out the "burglars family statement", following the jury
decision, to the press deserves a strong reprimand at least. In this
action he plainly placed the Police alongside and in support of (a)
convicted criminal (s) thereby also risking claims of partiality. If any
of those amongst our cyber group of FAC holders have answered the
interrogative questions of the local friendly FIO in preparation for
renewals - you will know only too well that support of or association
with "known criminal elements" is not generally seen as a "plus" point
on the application ! maybe this no longer applies to "serving officers"
?
For the moment - I rest my case.
Eternal Vigilance is still the price of Freedom - and Justice - David
-------[Cybershooters contacts]--------
Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website & subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
