Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

As a non-criminal lawyer and therefore speaking on these issues purely as a layman, I have to say that;

(1) I personally can see no objection whatsoever to "witnesses having to face questions from the defendant in person". Can any specialist explain precisely why this is unjust?

(2) Can the same specialist explain how it furthers the ends of justice when "court-appointed lawyers are asked by defendants for an informal view of the evidence" and "this results in a change of plea to guilty"? Is it never the case that the innocent may be persuaded to plead guilty in order to escape heavier consequences? And is it ever acceptable that an innocent person should be convicted, whether on his own admissions or by any other means?

(3) Could our specialist also explain why the "vulnerable complainant" should expect to be spared the "ordeal" of giving evidence? Is it not a fundamental requirement of the rule of law that a complainant, vulnerable or otherwise, should be called upon to prove his/her case?

As I say, I merely ask for information.

Your details

Cancel