Sean Hodgson does 27 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit and lousy judge Sheldon (is he still alive, the useless bastard?) doesn't even get a slap on the wrist.

I remember when I met Paul Blackburn, another miscarriage of justice victim, 4 years ago and said they should lock up the judge in his case for life, he clapped his hands.

Judges who get it badly wrong (Sally Clark, Barry George, etc etc) never suffer at all.

Unlike bankers who get fired at least, even if they do get pensions.

Britain's judges are useless, trials are farcical, you are guilty unless you can prove your innocence, judges favour police, prosecutors and, most of all, the media.

Lock up any judges who got it wrong, I say.

Were there juries in these trials? If so, doesn't the judge have to abide by the verdict of the jury?

Things only seem to get done when both opinion polls and the meejah collide.Can't see that happening,they'd have to admit how their headlines contributed to the public's bloodlust at the trials.

Judges direct juries, Cat - and most juries consist of brain dead morons who want to get home, please.

Judges are meant to ensure fair trials.

How can a judge keep his job when, for example, he allows the prosecution to change the dates on charges without allowing the defendant to discover or present alternative defence ("I was living in Australia that year... I broke my leg and was immobile that year... the TV series he claimed to adore wasn't broadcast until two years later... I was in America at that time...").

And then fails to point out to the jury that they haven't heard one word of defence for the new time frames/dates?

I reckon they should bring back capital punishment for judicial crimes like that.

Judges tell the jury what to do.

In addition Coroners do as well.

The DE MENEZES case was a tragedy for British justice. The police lied all the way through the hearing - and yet the Coroner told the Jury they could not find an "unlawful killing" verdict. That has to have been the final proof that our courts are no more than Kangeroo Courts set up by the ruling Government to enforce its will.

When I went to school in the 60s/70s I was taught to respect the law in the UK. It was honourable - or so I was told. The past 9 years in particular have shown that the law rarely gets it right and the system exists to make alot of rich people richer. The victims in the system are both sides of the dock. They are but pawns in a sick game of "how much money can we make" and in cases like De Menezes " how much can we cover this up ".

Technically, judges can only advise the jury regarding verdict. In the De Menezes hearing the jury could still have returned an unlawful killing verdict. Even though the judge could have then dismissed them they would have sent out a strong message via the attending media. Once the jury have been handed the responsibility of deciding a verdict, the final decision is entirely up to them, within the confines of the law. Unfortunately, there are few juries who either understand this or have the courage to act against the advice of a judge.

And juries are not professionals, not trained.

Judges, like top bank executives, get a hugely well paid and vastly powerful job (literally life and death).

With that should come responsibility and accountability.

Let down the system with wrongful convictions (most of which are absurdly easy to affect - like in my case) and they should not only lose their jobs but be punished.

And the media should start a serious Name and Shame campaign (not just for the usual "not strict enough" cases).

I agree...judges who mis-direct a jury should face a penalty. Judges carry enormous influence in a trial..in that a good or bad one cne can push questioning in certain directions. A judge can recommend the jury bring in a verdict of 'not guilty' if he/she believes it to be the case.

There is a great unfairness in trials when police and prosecutors do the wrong thing..they never face a penalty. Police can blatantly lie and the greatest penalty is they are not believed..when they are really commiting perjury under oath.

2 examples here in Australia just show how everything is weighted against a defendant and the rule of law is collapsing.

In the infamous Dr Haneef case..ilegally detained at Brisbane Airport after the Glasgow bombings..police, Federal police and the chief prosecutor actually lied on documents and to the court in an attempt to keep Dr Haneef incarcerated indefinetly.

The end result will be that Haneef will receive $$millions in compensation but authorties who have admitted lying after an enquiry questioned them , have got off scot free and kept their jobs.

The first High Court judge to ever be charged-Justice Marcus Einfield has just been sent to jail for 2 years. for lying to get out of a $77 speeding fine.

This is a disgrace in the opposite way...Einfield was an extremely popular judge who aided so many causes that we all talk about on here..he was a liberal judge in a conservative atmosphere..hated by the establishment..and was a world renowned advocate for the Palestinian cause..earning him great emnity amongst his own Jewish community.

The polce went on a witch-hunt...they had always hated Einfield and they have finally broken a good man.