Reading a book about the French ( I think Italy is the same) system of justice...investigative rather than adversorial with an independent magistrate investigating before charges and making the final decision with police having a lesser role.

I'm beginning to think it may be superior.

Yes Veritas it has been mentioned on here before,and in my opinion neither JK's or my false allegation would have got past the magistrate's investigation.

veritas wrote:
investigative rather than adversorial with an independent magistrate investigating before charges

Do the CPS not carry out such a role in the UK?

The basic problem with today's "justice" systems is that they are highly punitive and they don't really seek core solutions for why people commit crimes. In the US, and I'm sure it's getting this way in the UK too, the prisons are jammed pack. People are so vindictive and judgmental. They just want to throw stones and flaunt their own moral vanity. It's sickening.

If we in the West ever want to become truly civilized as we claim to already be, then we're going to have to learn how to treat crime in an objective, non-judgmental fashion.

Tom wrote:
veritas wrote:
investigative rather than adversorial with an independent magistrate investigating before charges

Do the CPS not carry out such a role in the UK?

They work hand in hand with the cops,not an independant organisation in the same way.

Tom wrote:
veritas wrote:
investigative rather than adversorial with an independent magistrate investigating before charges

Do the CPS not carry out such a role in the UK?

certainly do..as they do in New Zealand , Australia and the USA who inherited the same justice system.

But I am coming around to thinking that all talk from prosecutors, district attorneys, CPS etc is about whether they can win..rather than an entirely independent person such as a magistrate investigating the evidence.

However of course we would have to know whether France is notorious for banging up innocent people. I believe once you get into the system there it is harsh.,.difficult to get bail and so on...hence my studies !

Get the easy false allegations,while arresting decent peeps defending their homes from knife weilding thugs!
We don't have a justice system,more of a joke

TED wrote:
The basic problem with today's "justice" systems is that they are highly punitive and they don't really seek core solutions for why people commit crimes.

Surely, its not the job of the justice system to "seek core solutions" is it ?

They administer justice ....

veritas wrote:
But I am coming around to thinking that all talk from prosecutors, district attorneys, CPS etc is about whether they can win..rather than an entirely independent person such as a magistrate investigating the evidence.

isn't that the same thing, veritas ?

If you cannot "win" then the person is acquitted (not because they are innocent but because there is not enough evidence to convict "beyond a reasonable doubt")

In The Know wrote:
veritas wrote:
But I am coming around to thinking that all talk from prosecutors, district attorneys, CPS etc is about whether they can win..rather than an entirely independent person such as a magistrate investigating the evidence.

isn't that the same thing, veritas ?

If you cannot "win" then the person is acquitted (not because they are innocent but because there is not enough evidence to convict "beyond a reasonable doubt")

The problem here ITK as I and JK know too well is that reports of crimes are not looked at 'independantly'
any old fool can make an allegation,and instead of looking at it independantly it is as good as assumed to be true.
Meanwhile real crimes go unreported/detected/solved while 'easy' targets are milked for meejah value and crime figures improved.

In The Know wrote:
veritas wrote:
But I am coming around to thinking that all talk from prosecutors, district attorneys, CPS etc is about whether they can win..rather than an entirely independent person such as a magistrate investigating the evidence.

isn't that the same thing, veritas ?

If you cannot "win" then the person is acquitted (not because they are innocent but because there is not enough evidence to convict "beyond a reasonable doubt")

not necessarily..ie US Attorneys get elected so the more people they bang up the better. In fact the system has become perverted there with their 'plea bargains'- great example- Pee Wee Herman pleaded guilty to a 'mis-demeanor' over a collection of nude pics the FBI claimed were kiddy porn..yet the NY Met said they were all art..but his choice ?..probably two hundred grand in legal fees to plead not guilty or a slap on the wrist (for a non-crime).

I'm still not convinced France's system is better..perhaps they both achieve the same in the end but our justice system is under permanent attack from the media..something that did not happen 40 years ago.

Innocent Accused wrote:
The problem here ITK as I and JK know too well is that reports of crimes are not looked at 'independantly'
any old fool can make an allegation,and instead of looking at it independantly it is as good as assumed to be true.

Can you explain ?

Who would be "independent" ?
What would this independent person / organisation do, that is not already done by the CPS ?

The allegations would still have to be tested, and you also have to realise that many other factors come into play too ... such as how convincing would the claimant be in Court etc ?

Its all down to the same thing .... is there enough evidence to convict !

Dont get me wrong - I think there is quite alot wrong with our present system, but cannot think of a better, fairer alternative - to both accuser (there ARE genuine accusers too, you know !) and defendant

veritas wrote:
not necessarily..ie US Attorneys get elected so the more people they bang up the better.

That sounds like a wonderful example of playing the numbers game ... lock someone up (it doesnt matter who) as long as you can claim that the crime is "solved" !

It does little for justice (but then these are Yankers that we are talking about).

The media criticise everything more now than they did 40 years ago .... royalty for example ?

In The Know wrote:
Innocent Accused wrote:
The problem here ITK as I and JK know too well is that reports of crimes are not looked at 'independantly'
any old fool can make an allegation,and instead of looking at it independantly it is as good as assumed to be true.

Can you explain ?

Who would be "independent" ?
What would this independent person / organisation do, that is not already done by the CPS ?

The allegations would still have to be tested, and you also have to realise that many other factors come into play too ... such as how convincing would the claimant be in Court etc ?

Its all down to the same thing .... is there enough evidence to convict !

Dont get me wrong - I think there is quite alot wrong with our present system, but cannot think of a better, fairer alternative - to both accuser (there ARE genuine accusers too, you know !) and defendant

While I pretty much agree the fact is the CPS work 'hand in glove' with the police.They are not seen as independant,unlike say a magistrate who would look at all possibilities with a more open mind.
An example would be the Tomlinson case and the refusal to charge the very guilty copper...until a coroner's court classed it as unlawful killing.A magistrate would have been far more likely to have done that in the beginning.

Innocent Accused wrote:
While I pretty much agree the fact is the CPS work 'hand in glove' with the police.They are not seen as independant,unlike say a magistrate who would look at all possibilities with a more open mind.

Does it matter ?
There is either enough evidence to convict - or there isn't ?


An example would be the Tomlinson case and the refusal to charge the very guilty copper...until a coroner's court classed it as unlawful killing.A magistrate would have been far more likely to have done that in the beginning.

I agree ... but think you will have an uphill struggle trying to get justice from the police. They ... like the army .... are the "good guys" as far as the governments are concerned (the force of power).

I believe the cuts will change this somewhat.

In The Know wrote:
Innocent Accused wrote:
While I pretty much agree the fact is the CPS work 'hand in glove' with the police.They are not seen as independant,unlike say a magistrate who would look at all possibilities with a more open mind.

Does it matter ?
There is either enough evidence to convict - or there isn't ?


An example would be the Tomlinson case and the refusal to charge the very guilty copper...until a coroner's court classed it as unlawful killing.A magistrate would have been far more likely to have done that in the beginning.

I agree ... but think you will have an uphill struggle trying to get justice from the police. They ... like the army .... are the "good guys" as far as the governments are concerned (the force of power).

I believe the cuts will change this somewhat.


Yes indeed those cuts may just yet have a silver lining