<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Are Juries Fair? UK Study Says Yes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.slaw.ca/2010/02/18/are-juries-fair-uk-study-says-yes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.slaw.ca/2010/02/18/are-juries-fair-uk-study-says-yes/</link>
	<description>Canada&#039;s online legal magazine</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:35:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Stubbs</title>
		<link>http://www.slaw.ca/2010/02/18/are-juries-fair-uk-study-says-yes/comment-page-1/#comment-750527</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Stubbs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Nov 2010 20:25:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slaw.ca/?p=17786#comment-750527</guid>
		<description>I have recently sat through a first and second trial where a so called police expert with no real qualifications for the job influenced the jury to find the defendant guilty. He denied all the evidence of eye witnesses even so far as saying that the accident did not happen where all the eye witnesses said.He produced a fibre as evidence which he did not have tested, it was found later to be false. Of the physical evidence  he chose only to use that which helped his argument and denied that the other was relevant. Yes, he was out to stitch up the defendant.

Appeal after the first trial was successful with the appeal judges being very critical of the prosecution.
My question is  &quot;how can a jury be taken in by such exagerations and lies&quot;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have recently sat through a first and second trial where a so called police expert with no real qualifications for the job influenced the jury to find the defendant guilty. He denied all the evidence of eye witnesses even so far as saying that the accident did not happen where all the eye witnesses said.He produced a fibre as evidence which he did not have tested, it was found later to be false. Of the physical evidence  he chose only to use that which helped his argument and denied that the other was relevant. Yes, he was out to stitch up the defendant.</p>
<p>Appeal after the first trial was successful with the appeal judges being very critical of the prosecution.<br />
My question is  &#034;how can a jury be taken in by such exagerations and lies&#034;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon Chester</title>
		<link>http://www.slaw.ca/2010/02/18/are-juries-fair-uk-study-says-yes/comment-page-1/#comment-723382</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon Chester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:58:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slaw.ca/?p=17786#comment-723382</guid>
		<description>For those not familiar with English social statistics abbreviations BME = &lt;em&gt;Black, minority ethnic,&lt;/em&gt; though as a description it&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.vawd.org.uk/?idno=7118&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;somewhat vague in its reach&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For those not familiar with English social statistics abbreviations BME = <em>Black, minority ethnic,</em> though as a description it&#039;s <a href="http://www.vawd.org.uk/?idno=7118">somewhat vague in its reach</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  www.slaw.ca/2010/02/18/are-juries-fair-uk-study-says-yes/feed/ ) in 0.33980 seconds, on Feb 9th, 2012 at 9:11 pm UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on Feb 9th, 2012 at 10:11 pm UTC -->
