Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Inquisitorial System also does not have the same regard for such things as the right to silence, and such justice systems are often more about trusting the Government to provide justice as the professionals in the Inquisitorial System are Government appointed rather than the adversarial system which allows the appointment of an aggressive defence team against and promotes free speech.
Interestingly in Scotland you have the right to remain silent in interviews, while in England you can remain silent but courts are allowed to draw a negative inference from your silence.
So there are big differences in the UK in that regard, and Scotland is much similar to the US on this specific aspect.
English law and Scottish law are quite different in a number of aspects - English law is common law while Scottish law is a hybrid for example. There are some fundamental differences that are even greater than that between states in the US.
Interestingly in Scotland you have the right to remain silent in interviews, while in England you can remain silent but courts are allowed to draw a negative inference from your silence.
That may or may not happen here also, even though we have the 5th. Defendant never knows what jury is thinking, or what they are judging defendant on.
I admit I am ignorant to this so I wont say much. I know well how our system works, other countries not so much. I know there are lawyers and trials and juries in other countries but not the nitty gritty.
The US system is the British system.
There's a reason why they call it "English Common Law."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister 7
I have heard before that in England you are guilty until proven innocent, but that may not be true.
You heard wrong because it's not true.
It is true in France and those countries that use the Napoleonic Code, but not true in those countries that use English Common Law.
As you might have already guessed, there are countries that use a hybrid of Napoleonic Code and English Common Law and then there are countries that use Napoleonic Lite.
There's a reason why they call it "English Common Law."
Well, I don't know about that. We in the USA have a Constitution unique to our country and citizens. It was just pointed out above that "remaining silent can be held against you" (officially) in England. Here, the police have to have a reason to even talk to you.
There's a reason why they call it "English Common Law."
You heard wrong because it's not true.
It is true in France and those countries that use the Napoleonic Code, but not true in those countries that use English Common Law.
As you might have already guessed, there are countries that use a hybrid of Napoleonic Code and English Common Law and then there are countries that use Napoleonic Lite.
No, the Napoleonic Code is a civil code. It doesn't deal with criminal matters at all. Those countries have a separate criminal code that AFAIK operates on the innocent til guilty principle.
China and Japan do the reverse. Maybe that's why Carlos Goshn jumped bail in Japan.
The differences betw the laws are almost entirely rooted in the hot button social issues.
So long as people can pretend to hide behind "law" and "rights" to prop up injustice... what do we have?
Not quite. An abusive regime wishing to extend THEIR interpretation of their states rights...
is the sole reason that led to the Civil War.
They were wrong then, their grandfathers were wrong in 1776, their progeny grew up learning wrong and continue to promote wrong.
Their grandfathers were wrong in 1776? Really?
NOW YOU TELL ME, do you mean that I could be a U.S. citizen, living legally on Florida’s Gulf Coast, singing the Star Spangled Banner at baseball games in Tampa or Miami with my hand over my heart?
The only downside being that I wouldn’t get medical care on the government’s dime like I do as a U.K. citizen.
There's a reason why they call it "English Common Law."
The U.S. effectively started out with the system of English Common Law, but over time the systems have diverged, especially at the British end. England doesn't have a Grand Jury system to decide whether there's sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal prosecution, for example - That's entirely at the discretion of the Crown Prosecution Service. Try asking for a jury trial in England for many lesser offenses - You won't get it because the laws have been changed over the years to eliminate that (instead the best you can get is a trial at a Magistrates' Court). Many changes in the legal system came into effect during the 1990's when the traitor in 10 Downing St. at the time signed more powers away to the EU. With the U.K. having left the European Union, I haven't heard anything about those laws being amended to return to the previous way things were done - They'll just be handled at national level instead of by the EU courts.
The only downside being that I wouldn’t get medical care on the government’s dime like I do as a U.K. citizen.
Well, it's not like it's anyone from the Houses of Parliament who are personally paying for your NHS care. You're paying for it through taxes, and from what I hear the NHS in some areas can be pretty dire these days, with ridiculously long waiting lists for some things, not to mention the ever-changing rules. Some 25 years ago I remember my mother complaining about having to pay for eye tests and dental work - Something she had been told was covered by the NHS for all the years she had paid into it, then when she actually needed it, the government had changed the rules so it wasn't covered. If a private insurance company tried to do that here, I think there would soon be a class-action lawsuit for a breach of contract.
Well, it's not like it's anyone from the Houses of Parliament who are personally paying for your NHS care. You're paying for it through taxes, and from what I hear the NHS in some areas can be pretty dire these days, with ridiculously long waiting lists for some things, not to mention the ever-changing rules. Some 25 years ago I remember my mother complaining about having to pay for eye tests and dental work - Something she had been told was covered by the NHS for all the years she had paid into it, then when she actually needed it, the government had changed the rules so it wasn't covered. If a private insurance company tried to do that here, I think there would soon be a class-action lawsuit for a breach of contract.
You can get an MRI in 1-2 business days here. If it's emergency, right away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
