According to the BBC, at the launch of the Serious Organised Crime Agency, Blair has suggested lowering the burden of proof for the cases it deals with (is it a coincidence Blunkett is pushing for a lower burden for terrorist offences? I think not):
''Visiting the National Hi-Tech Crime Unit in London's Docklands on Monday, the prime minister said: "We're not going to beat organised crime if we simply work in the way we worked 15 or 20 years ago."
"We've got to be hard, efficient and, if necessary, ruthless."
He added that it was his "impression" that sometimes "the system is struggling against a presumption that you treat these crimes like every other type of crime and that you build up cases beyond reasonable doubt".
"I think we have got to look at this."''
And:
''"To require everything beyond reasonable doubt in these cases is very difficult"''
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3473441.stm.
How long will it be before all British trials are conducted by judge only, with state vetted counsel, using the balance of probabilities test, with the option of withholding evidence from the defendant and the right to silence completely abolished?
Posted by James Hammerrton at February 10, 2004 05:19 AM"How long", Not very much longer, the police state gets closer every day. Strange how many lawyers there are in Westminster, still they have to make a living somehow!!
Posted by Derek Buxton at February 11, 2004 03:03 PM