GET RID OF LAW OF JOINT ENTERPRISE

The law relating to Joint Enterprise is a mess. Currently, someone who is miles away from the scene of the crime can be convicted of planning and abetting the crime on the "evidence" of the perpetrator and circumstantial evidence. The person who is supposed to have planned the crime can get a sentence equal to or even in excess of the sentence handed to the perpetrator.

There are already existing laws relating to aiding and abetting the commission of a crime or being an accessory. The law relating to Joint Enterprise has led to miscarriages of justice.

Why is this idea important?

The law relating to Joint Enterprise is a mess. Currently, someone who is miles away from the scene of the crime can be convicted of planning and abetting the crime on the "evidence" of the perpetrator and circumstantial evidence. The person who is supposed to have planned the crime can get a sentence equal to or even in excess of the sentence handed to the perpetrator.

There are already existing laws relating to aiding and abetting the commission of a crime or being an accessory. The law relating to Joint Enterprise has led to miscarriages of justice.

GIVE JUDGES MORE DISCRETION

Schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 fetters trial judges unnecessarily in handing down sentences for murder. They are the ones who have sat through the case and they are the experts as to the level of sentencing. The last government listened to fears in the tabloid press and passed this populist measure. They should not have interfered as they are amateurs in this important decision-making process. Leave sentencing to the professionals. The schedule is vague, complicated and unnecessary.

Why is this idea important?

Schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 fetters trial judges unnecessarily in handing down sentences for murder. They are the ones who have sat through the case and they are the experts as to the level of sentencing. The last government listened to fears in the tabloid press and passed this populist measure. They should not have interfered as they are amateurs in this important decision-making process. Leave sentencing to the professionals. The schedule is vague, complicated and unnecessary.