In reply to Anonymous:
> not long ago since we heard members of our government arguing in favour of not letting suspects hear the case against them
You talking about motorists, "summary justice" or foetuses with ASBOs? Our government, despite being full of lawyers (or because of?), seems to have no sense of basic legal principles at all. Things like "innocent until proven guilty" are treated as irritating and trivial inconveniences to banging up those who "everybody knows" are wrong-uns.
Not to mention ideas such as fining cyclists £2500 for not having a (completely useless) bell on their bikes, also, less well known, suggesting that this "offence" might carry a sentence of up to 2 years in prison, or fining parents up to £500 for not putting kids on booster seats of no proven utility at all (might save up to 2000 lives per year, on the other hand, might save none at all).
Ah well, "for whom the (cycle) bell tolls". Most of these pieces of half-baked rubbish will never survive beyond the leak or press-conference, while those that do will be about as effectively applied as the Dangerous Dogs act or banning mobile phones while driving. Displacement activity, little more. The police will not seek to enforce, nor the courts apply, these absurd laws/penalties.
Bit more of a problem with the fundamental asault on civil-liberties though - at least while the death-spasm of this government lasts.
