The issue of fitness to
plead in criminal trials raises interesting, indeed fundamental philosophical, questions concerning justice.
Not exact matches
A
criminal jury
trial is practically unheard of for offences under the Competition Act, because the accused normally
plead out so the process is faster, especially
in cases like this one, where there is no real case law available under the act, Khoury notes.
The American
criminal justice system is far from being sufficiently enlightened, starting by too many presumed - innocent people caged without bond pending sentencing, moving to Virginia's crabbed
criminal discovery system, continuing to Virginia's system that allows prosecutors to scare defendants to
plead guilty by their refusal to waive a jury that
in many instances and locations can mean more racist jurors than judges on top of the jurors often being more wild cards than judges for sentencing, continuing to the many judges who choose judicial efficiency over a fair
trial, continuing to the brutal capital punishment system, cntinuing to excessive mandatory minimum and guideline sentencing, and continuing to the slew of innocent convicted people (many of whom
plead gulilty rather than risking a worse fate), and continuing to frequently excessive sentences and excessive probation violation sentences.
The same reasoning applies to certain aspects of more complex cases; for instance, the accused
in a
criminal trial may
plead not by showing up
in court but by clicking options on a website.
The line of authorities on the Police and
Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984), s 74 (admissibility of guilty plea of co-accused) as distilled
in the judgment of Lord Justice Staughton
in R v Kempster, [1989] 1 WLR 1125, [1990] 90 Cr App R 14 (indicating that s 74 should be applied sparingly, because the evidence that a now absent co-accused has
pleaded guilty may carry enormous weight
in the minds of the jury, but it is nevertheless evidence which can not properly be tested
in the
trial of the remaining defendant) remains relevant despite the passing of the
Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003).
In the courts, pleadings and trials, both civil and criminal, were in English only; in the land registry offices conveyances were in English onl
In the courts,
pleadings and
trials, both civil and
criminal, were
in English only; in the land registry offices conveyances were in English onl
in English only;
in the land registry offices conveyances were in English onl
in the land registry offices conveyances were
in English onl
in English only.