Thursday, 4 November 2010

CPS Push Return of Trial by Ordeal

Once again, the latest and the greatest in scandal-mongering hot gossip from Anarchy Central’s 24/7 Truth & Rumour Mill – with dispatches hand forged and crafted into bespoke satire to tempt the palates of all budding nihilists and career revolutionaries who carry the immortal bloodline of the rebel sons of Belial.

The right to trial by a jury, of twelve good men and true, for those who stand accused of wrong-doing in the eyes of the law traces its roots back to the composing of Magna Carta in 1215 and is regarded by British citizens with two ounces of nous to rub together as a key constitutional prerogative of the Third Estate.

The late High Court Judge Paddy Devlin once described the option of a jury trial by one’s own peers as the lamp which shows that freedom lives.
Persons charged with an ‘either way’ offence (hybrid offence, dual offence, Crown option offence, dual procedure offence, or wobbler) are the special class offences in the common law jurisdictions where the case may be prosecuted either summarily or as indictment. However, given the choice between trial by a jury of their own peers and trial in a magistrates' court, the majority of people will elect jury trial.

While the reasons vary it is the common opinion that magistrates are just shot-up-never-to-come-down local establishment worthies, superbly arrogant as they sneer at the accused miscreant in the dock before them, and being totally ignorant of the law – relying on the Clerk of the Court – a semi-legal beagle – to guide their erroneous judgements as they sentence some first offender to life imprisonment for double parking while dismissing charges of serial kiddie fiddling against one of their Masonic chums as unproven.

Whereas in contrast a judge will have risen through the ranks of the legal profession, and perhaps called to the Bar, to be well versed in the processes of the law – and too be neutral and without prejudices, for the person in the dock is to be considered innocent until proven guilty.
Plus the jury of 12 randomly selected individuals is there to sort through and around the inherent nuances of the prevailing evidence, ignore the semantics pantomime of the Prosecution, and take intuitive account of the personality and character of the one standing accused.

However, under the constraints of Posh Dave Scameron’s budget cuts viz public spending, the Commissioner for Victims of Crime, Chlamydia Mingerot, hoping to win a few brownie points to forward her political career, informed one reporter from the Penny-Pinchers Gazette that an excess of 70,000 Crown Court cases each year could be heard and tried before a magistrates' bench, saving the Exchequer upwards of £30 zillion quid per annum – an amount of shekels accountants and banksters would refer to as ‘lots and lots of money’

Before she got wholly castigated by public outcry, Commissioner Mingerot was keen to stress that, in her unqualified opinion, trial in a magistrates court is not second-class justice – just a different form of cut-price justice. A bit like buying wallpaper and paint from a Pound Stretcher outlet. Cheap and nasty.

In contrast, Ken Stammerer QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, told hacks from the gutter press that in his opinion he’d like to see a timely return to ‘Trial by Ordeal’ – the Dark Ages system that in itself was a proven ‘stand-alone’ crime deterrent.

“While there is no question that trial in the magistrates’ court is cheaper, at about half the cost of jury trial – the reintroduction of the highly successful judicial inquiry procedure of trial by ordeal will cut costs to absolutely fuck all.”
“First thing we can do is set up local courts with ducking stools at the side of the canal – now that will put a lot of the unwashed hoodie scrotes and scallies off criminal activities for a start.”

“Then bollocks to all these daft Community Service Order sentences and Asbo’s – let’s get real on proving guilt and culpability. Big cauldrons of scalding water – or a choice of hot lead or oil - personal preference – and dip your hand in there to see if you’re telling the truth. This stuff will leave the penalties of Sharia Law miles behind – especially if we bring back the pillory and lashings – plus tar and feathering.”

Allergy warning: This article was written in a known propaganda-infested area and may contain traces of slight exaggeration, modest porkies, misaligned references and lashings of slanderous innuendo.

No comments: