The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 1467 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 December 2023
John Swinney
I will try to draw some points out from what Mr Duffy has already said. The experience that you recounted about your participation as a jury member is insightful and brings further weight to the long-term argument that you, your wife and your family have pursued with such vigour and distinction.
However, it strikes me that your argument is, essentially, that the not proven verdict is a product or symptom of a lack of clarity in the judicial system. Is that a fair summary? You made a powerful plea for us not to bother defining it but, in a sense, because it cannot be defined, it can mean almost anything.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 December 2023
John Swinney
You used the term “middle ground”, and that might be the best way of explaining people’s view of the verdict. Whether we like it or not, there is an encouragement to believe that the not proven verdict is a middle ground, but it is not: it is on one side of the line, because it is essentially equivalent to being found not guilty. That has the potential to create confusion in the jury room about what people are feeling and about the conclusion that they come to.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 December 2023
John Swinney
So you can see the argument for a reduction in the size of juries, but a higher threshold for conviction.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 December 2023
John Swinney
What concerns would you have about the triangle of issues——jury size, majority versus supermajority and not proven—that I just mentioned? Would you simply not put them in that framework? Would you encourage me to stop thinking about them in that way?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 6 December 2023
John Swinney
Thank you for that. Last week, when we took evidence from the academics who were behind the jury research, I was struck by their argument about the interaction between jury size, the question of a majority versus supermajority within a jury and the presence or absence of the not proven verdict, and we laboured over the relationship between those three factors.
Essentially, Sandy Brindley has just put on record the question whether the correct decisions have been arrived at, as opposed to whether we are making a change here by abolishing the not proven verdict, on which Mr Duffy has made his beliefs clear.
Are we answering that question alone, or a hypothetical question about how we maintain convictions at the current level as opposed to what may be the correct level?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
John Swinney
Thank you. That is tremendously helpful information.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
John Swinney
Mr Keane, you tiptoed into this area earlier, so I agree that it is probably a question for you. For completeness, we could do with an understanding of how we got here.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
John Swinney
Thank you very much for that. In no way do I regret asking the question, because it is important that we have an understanding of the context in which the verdict emerged. Would it be fair to say that the historical development of the position in which we find ourselves has fuelled a lack of clarity in juries’ decision making?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
John Swinney
I will follow up on Pauline McNeill’s line of questioning by asking about the impact of the recent decision of the High Court of Justiciary, sitting as an appeal court, on aspects of corroboration in sexual offence cases. Do you consider that that affects the balance that I am interested in?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 29 November 2023
John Swinney
Thank you.