Letter: Trial by one's peers
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: It is not necessary to abolish the right to trial by jury, in any case in which it now exists, in order to achieve the cost savings and other benefits which the Government's proposals are designed to achieve. At present, any person convicted of an offence in the magistrates' court has a right to appeal to the Crown Court. The appeal is heard by a judge sitting with lay magistrates.
A minor amendment to the existing rules would give any person appealing against a conviction by a magistrates court, on a charge for which he has been refused trial by jury under the proposed new legislation, the right to have the appeal tried by a jury.
This would remove the objection to the Government's proposals, namely the withdrawal of the right to elect trial by jury in a whole range of cases in which a conviction would affect the defendant's reputation and might involve loss of liberty. At the same time, it would preserve the main benefit of the proposal, since the reported large majority of defendants who presently elect trial by jury merely to postpone the evil moment or for other tactical reasons, while intending all along to plead guilty at the Crown Court, would be dealt with in the magistrates' court.
Trial by jury would be reserved to those who - even after conviction in the magistrates' court - genuinely wish to contest their case in that way.
NICHOLAS STRAUSS QC
London EC4
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments