RobinXe wrote:
I am sad to say that I am unsurprised that the magitrates convicted; of those I know, precious few are capable of critical thought, even fewer are inclined to apply it to a case presented by the prosecution, and I'm not sure if more than one or two are even aware of the concept of presumption of innocence.
For those interested in a more balanced view of magistrates, each year something in the region of 1.3 to 1.4 MILLION cases are heard. That figure applies to a few years ago, it has reduced in recent years as so many people have been given the power to issue penalties.
An appeal is a complete new hearing at which new evidence can be presented, so it is not really possible to assume that an appeal which is upheld represents a mistake by the magistrates court that heard the case. I only have access at the moment to appeals statistics for 2005 to set against the 1.3 to 1.4 million cases heard per year at that time.
appeals allowed in full = 3,651
appeals allowed in part = 1,886
appeals dismissed = 3,791
appeal abandoned = 3,477
If my calculations are correct the appeals allowed in full or part amount, together, to about 0.4% of all cases.
Those figures are too high for comfort but clearly show that the picture presented by RobinXe is not accurate of magistrates as a group. I certainly don't recognise the features Robin comments on and I see a lot of magistrates at work. Including in the private discussions in the retiring room.
Robin, I strongly recommend that you report the magistrates you know to the local advisory committee as soon as possible so that they can be removed from office. You will, of course, need to be willing to provide proof and possibly give evidence to back up your assertions.