There should be a stricter code of conduct for the judges. At the moment the only thing that covers them is they should not be racist or prejudice at all.
Judges should not be allowed to say remarks as 'you have a man of outstanding character with no previous criminal record, but you only have to look in a newspaper and he has been abusing children for years. But put that aside and forget about that!!!!!
If that is not being prejudiced what is. Barristers have said that "they go up to the fence but don't go over it!!!!!" that is leading a jury to find him guilty.
There is a flaw in the legal system and you don't want to admit it. How can an innocent person prove their innocence if there is no evidence on which they have been convicted and the justice system will not go against one of their own. There should be a review of the appeal process.
Jack Straw would not listen, but that is not a surprise considering his knowledge and experience as a judge of the legal system and was one of them. I hope you listen and change the law to protect the innocent.
Why is this idea important?
When an appeal has gone in against the judge, the appeal gets turned down because it is one of their own and in the explanation there is doubt there……maybe the judge should have done this, should not have said that but still reject the appeal.
If a person on trial feels the judge is being biased, they should have the right to stop the trial and request another judge.
A judge should give a fair summing up on both sides. Not an hour for the complainant, adjourn for the day, then spend another hour saying the same thing for the complainant then 10 mins for the defendant.
If the appeals are rejected as Jack Straw said there is the CCRC. The rules for the CCRC is based on any new evidence, but what if the new evidence you have is not enough? There should be a system where they can look at a case and make it quicker. Remember people have been convicted on no evidence, why should they have to find some to get a hearing!!!