Scotland's not proven verdict is to be scrapped

I'll be interested to read other comments on this. Personally I think scrapping is a good idea but I know there are people with strong counter arguments.

My father (and I presume many others) used to characterise this verdict as "We bloody well know you did it but we can't quite prove it".

My father was of a similar opinion to yours Petera
Not proven = Found Not Guilty - but don’t do it again!
More seriously - it does mean a person can face a retrial doesn’t it?

MawtheMerrier

My father was of a similar opinion to yours Petera
Not proven = Found Not Guilty - but don’t do it again!
More seriously - it does mean a person can face a retrial doesn’t it?

I think even if found not guilty there can now be a retrial .

MawtheMerrier

My father was of a similar opinion to yours Petera
Not proven = Found Not Guilty - but don’t do it again!
More seriously - it does mean a person can face a retrial doesn’t it?

I think - but I wait to be corrected - that the outcome of not proven is identical to not guilty. So when a retrial was not possible for not guilty that was also true for not proven.

I remember reading somewhere that there is actually no legal definition of 'not proven'

Floradora9

I am not sure if this is a good thing or not . It does leave some people with doubt over whether they were guilty but just scrapped through but it must be horrible if you are really not guilty never being able to prove your case. I must admit I chose this cop out when I was on a jury. It was a bad case of careless driving but not being a driver myself at the time I could not be sure of guilt. I was please the chap did not get off as he killed a couple plus one of their children . One child who was a teenager lived and sat througfh the trial for some days with his grandparents. It was so sad.

So he did get off then?

I know little of Scottish law, but the double jeopardy rule was scrapped there, in certain cases, some years ago. Therefore, for example, a subsequent confession or new evidence which couldn't be found at the time would permit a retrial. The 'not proven' verdict has always seemed to me to mean 'we know you did it but can't, or are unwilling to, say we are satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt' and can as Floradora says be used as a bit of a cop-out. Either guilty or not guilty might focus jurors' minds. 'Not proven' will always be a cloud hanging over the accused.

I had to study Scots law as part of my training, and I remember our law lecturer putting up quite a convincing argument that in fact, there should only be two verdicts open to the courts - proven or not proven. I'm not saying I agreed with his argument, but it was very interesting. He was basically saying that as the courts are being asked to determine a person's guilt 'beyond all reasonable doubt', then all that was required was that the case be either proven or not proven. I'm obviously missing out a lot of what he said - it was rather a long time ago - but it was certainly a thought-provoking discussion.

argymargy

Floradora9

I am not sure if this is a good thing or not . It does leave some people with doubt over whether they were guilty but just scrapped through but it must be horrible if you are really not guilty never being able to prove your case. I must admit I chose this cop out when I was on a jury. It was a bad case of careless driving but not being a driver myself at the time I could not be sure of guilt. I was please the chap did not get off as he killed a couple plus one of their children . One child who was a teenager lived and sat througfh the trial for some days with his grandparents. It was so sad.

So he did get off then?

As I said I was pleased he did not get off , he was found guilty.

Floradora9

argymargy

Floradora9

I am not sure if this is a good thing or not . It does leave some people with doubt over whether they were guilty but just scrapped through but it must be horrible if you are really not guilty never being able to prove your case. I must admit I chose this cop out when I was on a jury. It was a bad case of careless driving but not being a driver myself at the time I could not be sure of guilt. I was please the chap did not get off as he killed a couple plus one of their children . One child who was a teenager lived and sat througfh the trial for some days with his grandparents. It was so sad.

So he did get off then?

As I said I was pleased he did not get off , he was found guilty.

Sorry - you said you chose Not Proven. I guess you were overruled?

Obviously a majority verdict was accepted.