Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

This is certainly novel. A judge halts a trial because the witness is "too believable". Mind you, the headlines on these sorts of things normally belie the full story. The judge sits through the whole case and if he thought a "three second" glimpse of the robber was insufficient to ensure a safe conviction, then that is his judgment. He is paid to exercise his judgment. It would be interesting to know what the process is to scrutinise the judge's judgment. I doubt there is such a process.

A driving instructor who was punched and robbed as she was giving a lesson was left furious and disappointed after a judge told her she was “too believable” to testify against her alleged attacker.
Instead, the judge awarded Denise Dawson £250 from public funds and acquitted the man accused of the robbery.
Judge James Tabor, QC, told the 35-year-old mother of two that she was “honest, utterly decent and brave” but her “impressive” performance in the witness box could sway the jury unfairly.
The case against Liam Perks collapsed because the judge felt that Mrs Dawson’s “three-second” glimpse of the robber was insufficient to ensure a safe conviction.

No comments:

Post a Comment