[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I think the fact that he was a Labour Peer is irrelevant.

I agree, I think if that dossier mentioned a while ago was ever produced and acted upon, all parties would probably have skeletons in the cupboards as to previous 'dubious' activities.

From my law angle,I would be saying this as to anyone, if they couldn't now understand the charges or be questioned,or be able to answer same to the point of also not being able to understand the court proceedings.
Then unfortunate as that may be, they cannot get a fair trial,if they cannot understand or speak in defence of themselves.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I agree, I think if that dossier mentioned a while ago was ever produced and acted upon, all parties would probably have skeletons in the cupboards as to previous 'dubious' activities.

From my law angle,I would be saying this as to anyone, if they couldn't now understand the charges or be questioned,or be able to answer same to the point of also not being able to understand the court proceedings.
Then unfortunate as that may be, they cannot get a fair trial,if they cannot understand or speak in defence of themselves.

No argument from me there Joey. As you say, if he is suffering from Dementia then he is incapable of defending himself and as unfortunate for British Justice as this may be, the decision not to prosecute is the correct one.

I do not think that there is ANY institution in this country (or any other for that matter) where some of the 'members' do not have 'skeletons in the closet' - and that includes the Judiciary.

[arista]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

No argument from me there Joey. As you say, if he is suffering from Dementia then he is incapable of defending himself and as unfortunate for British Justice as this may be, the decision not to prosecute is the correct one.

I do not think that there is ANY institution in this country (or any other for that matter) where some of the 'members' do not have 'skeletons in the closet' - and that includes the Judiciary.

Wrong
it can still go ahead
without him in Court.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by arista

Wrong
it can still go ahead
without him in Court.

That would be ridiculous and with respect I studied law.
If he just wasn't turning up, that would be a different thing altogther and he could be tried in his absence.

If he is however unable to even enter a plea as to not guilty or guilty,especially if he has someone who has to act as his power of attorney as to everyday affairs too,then it would be inhumane to hold such a trial.

As unfair as that is for no trial to be possible in anyones interests.
If his dementia is at the stage his Doctors have said, so bad that he could not take part or understand the proceedings,then it would likely be thrown out of court anyway.
No judgement could justifiably be made and I doubt any judge would do so either.

You are surely aware of what dementia is,memories, of people, including family and friends, life and events.good and bad, all gone for good.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

That would be ridiculous and with respect I studied law.
If he just wasn't turning up, that would be a different thing altogther and he could be tried in his absence.

If he is however unable to even enter a plea as to not guilty or guilty,especially if he has someone who has to act as his power of attorney as to everyday affairs too,then it would be inhumane to hold such a trial.

As unfair as that is for no trial to be possible in anyones interests.
If his dementia is at the stage his Doctors have said, so bad that he could not take part or understand the proceedings,then it would likely be thrown out of court anyway.
No judgement could justifiably be made and I doubt any judge would do so either.

You are surely aware of what dementia is,memories, of people, including family and friends, life and events.good and bad, all gone for good.

Succinctly put, Joey.