Lots of countries don't have jury trials. If it isn't an issue for other countries, why are we so hung up on it? Seems like we are doffing the cap to the English way of doing justice by insisting on jury trials. Essentially, jury trials are a common feature in those countries that were part of the British Empire, but many of them have moved away from it.
Mate...quiet why you think pointing at jury trials being related to english is gonna win people around is beyond me....its the discussion equilavent of a chimpanzee throwing sh1t trying to get something to stick,
Its time to abloish it,it hasnt been reformed and they have had long enough to do so,pull the plug,it serves no purpose in the 21st century
I think he did time for his PIRA activities. As you well know, SF pursued a Peace Process and brought PIRA with them - presumably why this bloke and other dissident repubicans hate Sinn Fein and frequently threaten them (fairly recently Michelle O'Neill and Gerry Kelly was told by the PSNI that there were threats to their lives by dissident republicans).
So it looks like Blanch you are on the same side of SF when it comes to this debate about dissident republicans.
How can you say that non-jury trials have no role in the 21st century when most countries have non-jury trials and there are a long list of bad jury decisions out there - O.J. Simpson being one of the most famous, where juries made different findings in civil and criminal cases.
Terrorists like jury trials because they have the organisation and freedom to intimidate the jurors.
As we have seen from various whistleblower cases anyone can intimidate in any strata of society.
It isn't exclusive.
It also isn't an excuse for 'special courts'.
To me,if you cant muster evidence to convince a jury,there isnt enough evidence to convict and 100 guilty people free is preferable to 1 innocent person locked up in the wrong
Bombastic,childish references to american justice system (which is grossly unequal) to justify doing away with juries,are little bit silly imo
Are you still banging this drum
The only reason you want the SCC scraped is that you want your friends in the Real IRA and people like Aaron Brady, a cop killer out on the streets again.
I watched with both disgust and amusement while you died a death defending Aaron Brady in another thread.
People who commit crimes get sent to jail in our courts Mark, NOBODY I know or NO political party has an issue with that.
Seems to me there are more proven accusations of the Gardai being corrupt than there are of intimidation of witnesses.
Unless you, unlike Brendi, can back up what appear to be idle musings about this stuff.
it would be interesting to hear the exact reasons why people think that the SCC is the antithesis of human rights.
i do agree that drawing of inferences which would not be allowed in a regular criminal case can be an issue but not enough to see it as a kangaroo court.
The reasons why different findings are made between civil and criminal trials are due to the differences in burden of proofs:beyond reasonable doubt v balance of probabilities and nothing to do with non jury criminal courts.
But what is your opinion on situations where you have enough evidence to convince a jury but they are scared to convict because of threats of violence?
What are you on about? The 'Courts' sentenced Aaron Brady to 40 years, for the murder of a Garda. And in the same breath, you are saying this is an injustice.
If you have some information that nobody else has, perhaps walk down to the local Garda station in the morning and tell them your story.
The whole reason the SCC came to be, was because SF/PIRA could not intimidate their way out of a conviction. It is now being used with great effect against hardened criminal gangs. If the PIRA didn't start murdering Gardai, or Prison officers or members of the Defence Forces, then maybe would not have had the SCC, but circumstances dictated its need.
What?
I said Aaron Brady's sentence was an injustice?
Aaron Brady could have been tried in ordinary court.
Yea sure, with his links to Irish Republicans and Criminal gangs, that would have been a slam dunk!
Still, you peddle the libel that the Garda in question was somehow corrupt. No shame Francie, you have no shame.
The breakthrough in the case came from an Irish republican living in the US, who wasn't intimidated and had no issue telling Gardai what he knew, other than suspecting the Gardai might have an agenda. Didn't stop him providing the info.
Did you follow the case or just take a position on it because of something you felt in your waters?
the SCC can be seen as an affront to a fair trial with how evidence is admitted and how it can have adverse inferences on the accused.
But notwithstanding that, Sinn Fein should not be campaigning for its abolition. If the SCC main future cases are high profile crime protagonists, what purpose and optics does SF campaigning portray?
Do you mean an ex-Irish Republican? We all know what happens to them, when they inform on their old pals.
Do you think Aaron Brady is innocent?
Am I missing something but this case was in the central criminal court with a jury. Not in the SCC.
Indeed you are right. Francie still thinks he is innocent though...
Completely irrelevant to a discussion about the SCC. Also irrelevant in a SF thread but I don’t know the background of it here.
Francie said NOTHING about his guilt or 'innocence' Mark. You are lying because you are losing again.
It's not all about winning and losing Francie. But it's interesting you made multiple claims about the Gardas integrity, with little or no evidence mind.
The evidence you seek is contained in the various whistleblower inquiries and other inquiries into wrongdoing.
Do you accept that the breakthrough in the Brady case came from an Irish republican?
No, the breakthrough came with the work and efforts of the Gardai in collecting evidence to put this man who had links to criminal gangs and Irish Republicans behind bars.
So you have no awareness of the case. As I said.
Gardai got their breakthrough when the witness came forward.
And guess what Mark?...I think he was a member of SF.
Isn't that awful for your hypothesis Agatha?
Do you mean a witness you consulted the party BEFORE talking to the Gardai? What was all that about.
Sinn Fein, the cult, strikes again!!
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sinn-f%C3%A9in-witness-consulted-party-over-aaron-brady-case-before-speaking-to-garda%C3%AD-1.4332502?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fcrime-and-law%2Fsinn-f%25C3%25A9in-witness-consulted-party-over-aaron-brady-case-before-speaking-to-garda%25C3%25AD-1.4332502
Yes, the witness who didn't trust the Gardai and checked first.
And STILL gave their evidence to the Gardai which gave the Gardai their breakthrough according to to the senior garda.
You are digging quite the hole here mark, like last night. Keep 'er lit as they say up here.
Maybe he didn't trust his mates in SF and their Irish Republican mates. We all know what happens to informers in Republican areas.
Very very very odd and weird that a witness had to clear it with a political party rather than go to the Gardai.
Not a normal party.
Give the jury any protection needed?
Its not as if judges were ever beyond the reach of paramilitaries anyway....the whole court is a farce
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c6e76a2e0d85c3808d93c2f75a0c528d.svg)
