Courts deny witnesses the right to anonymity - WTF???

[GhostRider]

Just caught Radio 2,

It seems that the law lords have now decided that no one is allowed to be an anonymous witness testifying against someone anymore, and that the accused should know who is testifying against them and see them face to face.

Yet another example of the brain-dead fucking idiots running this circus.

Do they really think anyone would ever come forward knowing damn well that the accused is going to get a good look at them, and may probably know them, which is inevitably going to result in said witnesses' door coming off at 3am and given a baseball bat massage or worse?

The arguements put forth are that they witness may have a grudge against the accused and so may testify to have a chance at hooking up with their girlfriend (the guy on the radio seriously said this as part of his arguement FOR) or just doesnt like that person and wants them to get locked up. I seriously can not think of anybody who would be stupid/desperate enough to be a witness at a trail of such seriousness just because they dont like the person, and willfully risk a bullet through the temple.

The people jailed for the shooting of the Shakespeare Girls on new years eve in Aston, Birmingham are now going to appeal against their conviction since disguised witnesses were present in their trial. I can assure anybody on good authority that if those jailed knew who was testifying against them then I wouldnt even give it a week before their heads were blown of their fucking shoulders.

I am missing something here or is this more insanity being injected into an already dismal British Law system?

GhostRider
____________________
I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly bloodlust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy. I think my mask of sanity is about to slip.

[pa_broon74]

I read about this yesterday on the BBC news website, its opened a real can of worms. I understand the logic behind the decision by the law lords, but as was mentioned in the article on the BBC web site, its idealism over pragmatism in this case.

As you say, you're just not going to get people coming forward. A balance needs to be struck between the two ends. I didn't hear the radio 2 thing (assuming its the JV show...) Witnesses must be made fully aware of the penalties for contempt and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7471025.stm is what I read yesterday...


____________________
Didn't catch anything.

[Itchy]

The problem is in the UK we do not have a witness protection scheme.

Otherwise non anon for witnesses is a GOOD thing, in that how exactly are you supposed to cross examine a witness and see if they are lying or not if you are given a statement on a piece of paper?.

Its almost as bad as the terrorism laws where you aren't allowed to see evidence presented against you..... also if the defence cannot ascertain who the identity of who the witness what safeguards are there that this witness actually exists?.

Who says it isn't a corrupt cop or corrupt CPS officer who wants to bump up his conviction stats and makes up testimony? , people at university fake interviews for their dissertations, marketting people fake results to get cash, why not the CPS?.

And yes there are people with big grudges , think of how many false rape cases there have been recently. I recall still in the 90s this case which happened nearby where I lived a deaf bloke was arrested for rape and battery, it went all the way to court, and she lied in court against him (she had been dumped by him) , turned out she had tied herself up and had her mate beat her up and pour paint on her.

We find it terribly unfair as motorists when the police withold their evidence photos until the very last second, this is pretty much the same thing.

Somewhat of course idealistic but thats how it is supposed to work.


EDIT

a good example of this is a terrible film called my cousin vinny, I managed to get the only treadmill infront of this TV screen, where the cross examination allows the defence council to tear apart the testimony of the witnesses.

EDIT 2

Oh and witness testimony should be known as not very reliable evidence anyway, much like people mistake DNA evidence as a magic bullet and will solve all crimes, or even finger prints which are discredited as evidence.


I've been berated by plenty of people for speeding like a lunatic when I was way below the limit and riding straight and level.
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.

[map]

The law has been inconsistent for years. It also depends on the judge, barristers, etc. as some appear to be just treading water or like to make trouble because they can.

For example take the rape laws. Woman accused man and has complete anonymity. Yet his man and face can be plastered all over the media as if guilty until proved innocent. Even then if found innocent probably lost job and family and seen as an leper by the community. IMO should be equal rights, both named or both anonymous. Wonder if that'll ever happen
____________________
...and the whirlwind is in the thorn trees, it's hard for thee to kick against the pricks...
Gibbs, what did Duckie look like when he was younger?

[pa_broon74]

I think in terms of rape, anonymity isn't guaranteed for the victim and in terms of the story, females giving false testimony is another matter altogether and definitely one that could have its own thread to itself due to the negative effects it has.

Written testimony has always been admissable in court using precognitions (in Scotland anyway) and statements I think in England (and Scotland too.)

I think this refers to evidence when its given from behind screens. Legal counsel are permitted to see who they are questioning, the defendants are not.

There is some text in law where it basically says defendants have a right to see whom is accusing them of such and such a crime.

[map]

[GhostRider]

One of the guys who phoned into the show told a story of how 20 years ago he witnessed a brutal robbery whihc involved people being stabbed, he was asked to give a statement, and was then told that he would have to appear in court and testify as a witness. He protested, sayin that he knew the people involved and what they were capable of, but the police told him he didnt have a choice.

So the inevitable happened and he got door-stepped, being told that if he uttered a word he was going to get his throat sliced, and also got grief in the streets.

He asked for police protection, and as you can guess, the police said they couldnt do a thing until somebody actually did something to him - so yes, you have to be stabbed before we can offer you protection to stop you from being stabbed......"

He turns up in court and refuses to say anything, court is adjourned and the judge takes him into his quarters and then says ay up whats going on here, guy explains the situation and that he is thinking of the welfare of his wife and kids. Judge says ahhh ok then, and then carries on the court proceedings, and puts it on record that if the guy doesnt give his testimony then he would be arrested and charged with perjury...... and so that happens, since he said being arrested cant be as bad as getting knifed. In the end the accused changed their plea so they were locked up anyway but it just goes to show how much the powers that be really couldnt give a flying fuck as long as they get their conviction and boost them oh so precious stats.

I think in the context of rape its a different ball-game. If someone is accused of rape, then chances are they are going to know who it is that they raped, surely? Therefore witness anonymity seems rather pointless, but I think Pa_broon74 covered that rather well.

GhostRider
____________________
I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly bloodlust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy. I think my mask of sanity is about to slip.

[chris-red]

I agree with this, how is a person suppose to defend him/herself if they do not know where the testimony is coming from.

i.e. Mark is on a murder wrap,

John is tesifing that he saw Mark commit the murder,

Mark slept with Johns wife years ago and John is lying about his testimony.

If Mark doesn't know who John his how can he defend himself?
____________________
Well, you know what they say. If you want to save the world, you have to push a few old ladies down the stairs.
Skudd:- Perhaps she just thinks you are a window licker and is being nice just in case she becomes another Jill Dando.
WANTED:- Fujinon (Fuji) M42 (Screw on) lenses, let me know if you have anything.

[Shay HTFC]

It's a really difficult one to answer.

Would you stand up in court against a serious killer if you knew that he'd be able to see your face and know who you were?
I know I wouldn't!
____________________
Full Motorbike License - GS500E '95

[map]

[Visitor Q]

Lets not forget many guys are weak... a girl has a grievance with a bloke, lies through her teeth and gets him arrested. If she happens to have any blokes desperate to get in her knickers and naturally resenting this ex of hers who /has/ got in her knickers...

Not a big stretch to make up a load of bullshit to curry favour.
____________________
China traffic/travel bike vid - When I make a sweeping statement, please add the word 'statistically' in to the sentence before you bitch...
From September 2014 to January/February 2015 I will not be using any English, nor reading any. As such, I won't be on here. PM at will, but I won't be checking/posting unless in emergencies. Certainly not for the first couple of months. Please berate me savagely if I break that rule...