BRITS CURB RIGHTS
I somehow missed this one: AP
The British Parliament on Thursday approved legislation to overturn “double jeopardy” protection for offenses such as murder, rape and armed robbery.
The centuries-old legal rule prevents suspects being tried twice for a crime and is enshrined in the legal codes of many of Britain’s former colonies, including the United States.
But under the Criminal Justice Bill, introduced by Prime Minister Tony Blair’s government, a person acquitted of certain serious offenses will face a second trial if compelling new details, such as DNA evidence, come to light.
The legislation, hailed by the government as the biggest reform of Britain’s criminal justice system in a generation, now only needs royal assent, which is virtually automatic, before it becomes law.
Blair’s government presented the legislation last year, but its progress through Parliament has been turbulent, largely due to clauses curbing the right to trial by jury. The House of Lords, Parliament’s upper chamber, which has the power to amend and delay legislation, opposed those clauses and repeatedly blocked the bill.
After intense talks Thursday, the Lords backed government plans for judge-only trials in cases where there is a danger a jury could be intimidated. The government in return agreed to put shelve its plans to scrap juries in complex fraud cases.
I know the Brits handle some aspects of due process quite differently than we do–for example, having judges routinely instruct juries that those excercising their right not to testify on their own behalf that they may infer the defendant has something to hide, the opposite of our system–but this is still very bizarre, especially coming from a government of the Left. I could see narrow circumstances–mainly involving gross fraud on the part of the defendant–where double jeopardy protections should be waived. But surely the fact that the state has found new evidence should be among those?
(Hat tip: Scott Chaffin)
