Jump to content

6 months jail for juror who looked up the defendant on the internet


Recommended Posts

Any prosecution has to be judged to be in the public interest as well as having a likelihood of succeeding, maybe that's why you don't see so many... (Speculating, I'm not sure, I don't even know how often such a clear lie would come up).

 

Yes you may well be right:

 

In a nutshell, it's maybe not worth the cost involved on the public purse. Which I suppose leads back to the original post. Was that prosecution worth it?........

 

Eeeeeeek....I'm going to hide under my desk now and wait for the flack to die down! :help:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you may well be right:

 

In a nutshell, it's maybe not worth the cost involved on the public purse. Which I suppose leads back to the original post. Was that prosecution worth it?........

 

Eeeeeeek....I'm going to hide under my desk now and wait for the flack to die down! :help:

 

Yes it was.... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you may well be right:

 

In a nutshell, it's maybe not worth the cost involved on the public purse. Which I suppose leads back to the original post. Was that prosecution worth it?........

 

Eeeeeeek....I'm going to hide under my desk now and wait for the flack to die down! :help:

 

In the case of the juror, yes, definitely, it has to be made clear to her and future potential jurors what is acceptable and what isn't, she went well beyond acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the juror, yes, definitely, it has to be made clear to her and future potential jurors what is acceptable and what isn't, she went well beyond acceptable.

 

I agree, what she did was unacceptable. So it was a 'show trial'..a deterrent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a nutshell, it's maybe not worth the cost involved on the public purse. Which I suppose leads back to the original post. Was that prosecution worth it?
Yes.

 

The alternative would see web/online research about a defendant by one or more jurors develop gradually, as a frowned-upon-yet-unopposed practice, with a corresponding gradual (further-) erosion of the righteousness of a trial-by-jury process.

 

Getting increasingly important in these days of any-Internet-content-accessed-anywhere-at-BB-speeds, and everybody-&-their-dog having a FB account and an ever-increasing amount of easily found and followed 'digital tracks'.

 

In a nutshell, that's what has been increasingly bugging judges up & down the country in recent times, and the motivation behind the (IMHO unjust because 'politically' motivated) harshness of the sentence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

 

The alternative would see web/online research about a defendant by one or more jurors develop gradually, as a frowned-upon-yet-unopposed practice, with a corresponding gradual (further-) erosion of the righteousness of a trial-by-jury process.

 

Getting increasingly important in these days of any-Internet-content-accessed-anywhere-at-BB-speeds, and everybody-&-their-dog having a FB account and an ever-increasing amount of easily found and followed 'digital tracks'.

 

In a nutshell, that's what has been increasingly bugging judges up & down the country in recent times, and the motivation behind the (IMHO unjust because 'politically' motivated) harshness of the sentence.

 

Well presented! :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pour encourager les autres? :)

 

Got it now!.....Who knows if she was encouraging others?...her argument was that the information she looked up was in the public domain anyway.

 

I'm not saying I agree with her notion, just that's what she said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.