UKC

Secret Trials

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 balmybaldwin 05 Jun 2014
In reply to toad:

Shhh! don't tell anyone...its a secret
OP toad 05 Jun 2014
In reply to balmybaldwin:

And it's only very recently that we've been allowed to know that we aren't allowed to know. What next? Secret one way helicopter flights over the English Channel?

This isn't how our judicial system is designed to work.
 lummox 05 Jun 2014
In reply to toad:

I don't understand. I thought the Cons were staunch defenders of liberty and the right of all to a fair trial by jury ? Say it isn't so..
 MG 05 Jun 2014
In reply to toad:

I'm trying to think what on earth the justification could be. Maybe if the defendants names were known, it would bring to light some informant and thus threaten their life? But if convicted surely the names will be known and the same problem arise - or will they be imprisoned in secret too? Either way, I can't see how secret trials can ever be justified - it's asking for miscarriages of justice.
 balmybaldwin 05 Jun 2014
In reply to MG:

Much more likely to be evidence provided from a secret source - a witness that is a spy, some clever but state secret intelligence gathering device etc.

Essentially, whilst not the most palatable thing, this does allow the court to properly investigate the allegations without the problem of what they are dicussing leading to criminals/terrrorists learning about a new surveilance technique that they could otherwise circumvent if they are aware of it
 balmybaldwin 05 Jun 2014
In reply to lummox:

I believe it was actually Labour that put in place the legal framework for these trials to happen (but it may not have actually been used) I could be wrong, but I'm sure I heard about the provision for secret trials around the time that GB extended one terrorism law or another (I think the one that allows terror suspects to be jailed for a month without charge)
 MG 05 Jun 2014
In reply to balmybaldwin:

Well OK, either human or technical evidence where the means coming to light is unhelpful. But still, what happens on conviction? Why can't just this evidence be kept secret. What's to stop the accused telling all afterwards - or do they not hear the evidence? Doesn't stack up to me.
New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...