Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Meanwhile, on Bluesky.



Was Stephen Bush and others saying this at the time of this NI cut, I wonder?

We're through the looking glass here, people.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Tue Dec 02, 2025 9:56 pm Meanwhile, on Bluesky.



Was Stephen Bush and others saying this at the time of this NI cut, I wonder?

They seemed to be too busy suggesting routes back for Sunak to save the election.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Tue Dec 02, 2025 10:16 pm We're through the looking glass here, people.

It's just fucking relentless, isn't it?

Youngian wrote: ↑Tue Dec 02, 2025 4:39 pm

I thinkit was on O’Brien this morning that somebody described his experience of jury service, and his fellow jurors, as this : In any jury, there are always two or three people that clearly don’t want to be there and would rather be anywhere else, two or three conspiracy-thory nutjobs, a couple of right-wing reactionaries, some people who will just go along with anything for the sake of a quiet life, and maybe one or two that you’d want keep sharp objects well away from. Which leaves you with perhaps three or four sane, rational, diligent, and conscientious individuals who will give the evidence presented due consideration and evaluation, and generally deliver the correct verdict.

A microcosm of the nation?
I don't like the sound of skimming back on jury trials as an upper middle class judge has a different experience of the honest British copper from working class people, particularly from ethnic minorities. Technically complex cases like fraud probably aren't suited to jury trials, though.

I would argue that these days a judge, who is trained to be impartial and will invariably have a desire to see justice done, is a better bet than a bunch of random bigots.