Woah, woah, woah, say that again?
RickyCo Industries Inc
13-02-2004, 23:21
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!
THIS IS NOT JUST SPAM AGAINST THE FAIR TRIAL!
Clause 10 gives the defendant the right to wave an impartial judge!
Seriously, how is that a fair trial?
The defendant can just keep waving judges until he/she gets one they like!
The defendant can also apply this to the second half of clause 7, which means that they can (in essence) wave the law!
Please vote against this bill!
It doesnt mean that they can keep waving judges until they get one they like, It means that they can wave the right to an impartial judge. Waving the right to something is not the same as waving the thing itself.
If you had the right to chocolate, but chose to wave the right, the chocolate would still be there, you just wouldn't eat it.
Similarly, if you had the right to an impartial judge, and you chose the wave that right, the impartial judge would still have been available, it's just that you chose not to use him/her.
Put better, "The right to an impartial judge" means "The right to refuse to take part in a trial if the judge is not impartial."
Yngwie Malmsteen,
Nibbleton UN Ambassador
RickyCo Industries Inc
14-02-2004, 21:17
It doesnt mean that they can keep waving judges until they get one they like, It means that they can wave the right to an impartial judge. Waving the right to something is not the same as waving the thing itself.
The problem is, you see, that the bill doesn't define a lot of things, namely the limits to the rights of the defendant. If it did say so, the you could quote it and that would be that.
Im not saying its a good proposal, I'm voting agaisnt it. I'm merely clarrifying the right to something and the right to wave your rights to something.
Yngwie Malmsteen,
Nibbleton UN Ambassador