[A] Dec 10, 2014.. Jose Colaco wrote: 5: Contrary to what you have asserted, Even in Ontario, Juries do NOT interpret the law. 6: You continue to MISS the single-most important facet (Absent in your story) which would have converted a (say) Manslaughter into Murder/Attempted Murder (all alleged, of course)
[B] Dec 10, 2014..., Mervyn Lobo responded: jc, I understand your argument on the higher level in point 5). In practice however, a jury in Canada will be fed the law, the jury instructions and they then have the task of a guilty or not guilty verdict (depending on how well they understood or interpret the law). The judge does the sentencing. RESPONSE: Dear Mervyn, For a chap who gave Roland Francis unmitigated hell for his error about Canadian Tigers, you are talking astonishing and unremitting gibberish while swinging from one point to another. Please STOP. You have already proved that You do not have a clue. In short REMEMBER this: a: Murder and attempted Murder require a Mens Rea - which could NOT have been present in the example (albeit fictitious) you provided. b: In (common law) Canada (as in Ontario)....Juries are NOT interpreters of Law. They are mere 'Finders of Fact'. The term 'Interpretation of Law' is very specific and not subject to imaginative Tigerbabian hyperelucidation. I am done with Porcaria. You may, however, carry on discussing with yourself ! jc
