On Sep 29, 9:20 pm, "The Todal"  wrote:
> Webmanager_CritEst wrote:
> > On Sep 27, 6:11 pm, Paul Hyett <p...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 at 05:10:07, Webmanager_CritEst
> >>  wrote in uk.legal :
>
> >>> 'It's better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man be
> >>> wrongly convicted'
>
> >>> Judges should order more retrials over unsafe convictions, says
> >>> criminal review chief
>
> >>> By Robert Verkaik, Law Editor
> >>> Saturday, 27 September 2008
>
> >>> The country's top appeal judges are failing to correct miscarriages
> >>> of justice where they suspect the jury has come to a wrong verdict,
> >>> the head of the body charged with investigating wrongful
> >>> convictions has warned.
>
> >> ISTM he's missed the whole point of the jury system...
> >> --
> >> Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
>
> > It is the best we have at the moment.
>
> Until we have perfected the science of mind-reading, the ability to
> determine for certain whether or not a defendant is lying.
>
>
>
> > At times, it makes terrible errors.
>
> Oh, you think so? Surely you mean "at times, the convictions is set aside as
> unsafe".  The judge is responsible for any error there may be, and many a
> guilty man has been let off on a technicality.

As it should be. The Reasonable Man does not have the capacity to make
such decisions, without regular error.

WM