REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

Two points that Colin made seem to me to be determinative.

1 It wasn't a real case

2 They knew they were on TV - were they perhaps encouraged to argue ?

As an evidential basis for attacking trial by jury it is about as reliable as Jeffrey Archer.

K's experience is I suggest much closer to the mark.

[QUOTE="Ardross, post: 2101131"] Two points that Colin made seem to me to be determinative. 1 It wasn't a real case 2 They knew they were on TV - were they perhaps encouraged to argue ? As an evidential basis for attacking trial by jury it is about as reliable as Jeffrey Archer. K's experience is I suggest much closer to the mark. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?