Search
This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian News

Reynolds can't get over it ... Former senator drops off news to her favourite hacks at The Australian ... Linda Reynolds is suing the Commonwealth and lawyers HWL Ebsworth over the Brittany Higgins settlement ... Claim that $2.4 million payment to former staffer affirmed Higgins' allegation ... Read more >> 

Politics Media Law Society


Rupert World ... Lord Moloch’s pal Doug the Diva – driving Washington spare … News UK’s model for unionism … What next for the Washington Post? … Concealed coal lobbyists running an anti-Teal campaign … More corruption busting for Stinging Nettle … The litigation industry spawned by Lehrmann ... Read on >> 

Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

Party time for Dicey ... Heydon's book - a pathway to rehabilitation ... The predatory man and the clever intellect - all wrapped up in the one person ... Academic tome and cancel agenda ... Despite the plaudits the record of abuse doesn't vanish ... Book launch with young associates at a safe distance ... Procrustes thinks out loud ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


The Lubyanka ... Bullying investigation into former Federal Court judge goes nowhere ... "Complaint unsubstantiated" ... Phew! ... Recommendations about staff education ... Nothing recommended for judicial induction ... More >> 

 

Justinian's Bloggers

Governance turmoil at Tiny Town Law Society ... Night of the long knives ... Lakeside in Canberra ... ACT Law Society upheaval over governance changes ... Bodies carted out of the council room ... Blood on the carpet ... Fraught litigation another distraction ... From Gang Gang ... Read more >> 

"We're in unchartered territory here. A Pope hasn't died before during an Australian election campaign."  

Jane Norman, National Affairs Correspondent, ABC News ... April 21, 2025 ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Letter from Rome ... Judges on strike ... Too much "reform" ... Berlusconi legacy ... Referendum on the way ... Constitutional court inflames the Meloni regime with decision on boat people ... Insults galore ... Silvana Olivetti reports ... Read more >> 


Justinian's archive

Tea is for Tippy ... Life of a tiffstaff ... Bright, ambitious and, when it comes to the crucial things, hopeless ... Milking the glory of the gig ...  Introducing Tippy, our new blogger filing from within the concrete cage at Queens Square ... From Justinian's Archive, March 15, 2010 ...  Read more >> 


 

 

« Bent coppers case dead in the water | Main | With great respect »
Friday
Nov052004

Entirely a matter for you

"You are now to retire, as indeed should I, carefully to consider your verdict of Not Guilty." ... Reprise of the Peter Cook skit of the Jeremy Thorpe trial ... Entirely a Matter for You ... Evan Whitton, from Justinian's archive November 5, 2004 

Matt, the cartoonist in The Daily Telegraph (UK) is commenting here on a Home Office plan to allow jurors to hear of accuseds’ previous convictions. The minister, David Blunkett, said:

“These reforms put victims at the heart of the justice system. Trials should be a search for the truth and juries should be trusted with all the relevant evidence to help them to reach proper and fair decisions.”

Defence herpetoids will find those sentiments both quaint and chilling, and the cartoon raises an ancillary issue: should untrained judges be the 13th juror, as some trained judges are in Europe? Three classic cases:

Justice Sir Nigel Cyprian Bridge summed up for a conviction in the 1974 Birmingham Six case. Mike Mansfield QC noted his technique in Presumed Guilty: The British Legal System Exposed (Heinemann, 1993):

“In a careful, almost total demolition of every defence witness and the lauding, sometimes verging on deification, of prosecution witnesses, the jury was corralled into the guilty pen as though driven by a diligent sheep-dog.”

The appeal court found in 1991 that Lord (as he had since become) Bridge was disastrously wrong.

In June 1979, Justice Sir Joseph Cantley summed-up for an acquittal in a case in which the Rt Hon Jeremy Thorpe was accused of being involved in a conspiracy to have Andrew Gino Newton murder Thorpe’s former lover, Norman Scott. Peter Bessell was the chief prosecution witness.

A few days later, Peter Cook, who said, “I could have been a judge, but I never had the Latin”, impersonated the judge at the Secret Policeman’s Ball for Amnesty International. He called the sketch Entirely a Matter for You, which is judgespeak for “entirely a matter for yours truly”.

“We have heard for example from a Mr Bex Bissell, a man who by his own admission is a liar, a humbug, a hypocrite, a vagabond, a loathsome spotted reptile and a self-confessed chicken-strangler. You may choose if you wish to believe the transparent tissue of odious lies which streamed on and on from his disgusting, reedy, slavering lips. That is entirely a matter for you ...

We have been forced to listen to the whinings of Mr Norman St John Scott, a scrounger, a parasite, a pervert, a worm, a self-confessed player of the pink oboe, a man, who by his own admission, chews pillows ...

The so-called hitman, Mr Olivia Newton John, is a piece of slimy refuse, unable to carry out the simplest murder plot ...

You are now to retire, as indeed should I, carefully to consider your verdict of Not Guilty.”

The jurors had taken Sir Joseph’s advice; he did not take Cook’s. 

In a 1987 libel case, that lying rodent, Jeffrey Archer, falsely denied that he had resorted to a dwarfish prostitute, Monica Coghlan. Summing-up, Justice Sir Bernard Caulfield seemed entranced by the icy charm of Mrs Mary Archer:

“Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? Has she been able to enjoy rather than endure her husband Jeffrey? Is she right when she says to you – you may think with delicacy - Jeffrey and I lead a full life? Is he in need of cold, unloving, rubber-insulated sex in a seedy hotel?”

Mary Archer: fragrant

The jury gave Archer £500,000, and Bernie added on costs of £700,000. In 2001, Lord (as he now was) Archer got four years for perjury at the trial.

An aspect of the kelpie approach, which lorn-order politicians may find curious, is that judges are said to understand that 99 percent of accused are guilty, but when sitting alone they hide heaps of damning evidence from themselves, and then give 74 percent the benefit of a doubt. Or so it seems from an alarming statistic in The Australian of August 27, 1994:

“Figures from the NSW District Court show that the jury convicted in half the cases while the judge, when hearing a case alone, convicted in only a quarter.”

That is really nice for criminals and their herpetoids, less so for victims and long-suffering citizens who pay judges’ wages.

And if judges are wrong twice as often as jurors, it follows that judges at jury trials would do well to keep their opinions to themselves, and that untrained appellate judges might think twice before second-guessing jurors.

The lorn-order chaps might also contemplate another curiosity: European judges and jurors sit together and hear all the evidence, and give only nine percent the benefit of the doubt. 

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Editor Permission Required
You must have editing permission for this entry in order to post comments.