Legal Man
I spoke too soon.
I have spent the last two days serving on a jury. And let me tell you, it was no fun. No fun at all.
The trial concerned football violence, which meant it was mainly conducted in a language that I didn't speak. And I don't mean the legal terminology. Other than being dull, my IBS went into full swing after lunch on day one - greed, through boredom, or greasy food? who knows - and I sat, afraid of breaking wind, and even more afraid of having to stop proceedings to dash to the loo.
Today, at 4pm, a verdict was reached. Not proven. Which meant that despite smashing a man's face to the point that he needed titanium plates and has no feeling in his jaw, the accused walked free*. I was all for guilty, but eight of our number disagreed.
There's justice for you.
On returning home, I was pleased to discover that Paypal had upheld my complaint about the non-appearance of my three tubes of Benefit Pineapple Facial Polish, discovered on eBay last month. I was less pleased to discover that while the complaint's been upheld, I'll get no money back. Apparently there's nothing they can do unless the naughty seller has funds in his or her Paypal account.
Again, there's justice for you. I have no product, and am £30 down.
Rubbish.
* I should clarify here. The fact the accused assaulted the victim to this extent was never in doubt. The question was whether or not it was self-defence.
Legal Man - Belle and Sebastian
Labels: eBay, Jury service, Justice
posted by Cat @ Thursday, July 03, 2008
11 Comments:
That is rubbish, on both counts. But espec on the eBay front.
Can you dispute the charges with your credit card company? That's ridiculous!
Jury service. How depressing! More so when centred around football violence. Oh, great joy....
...Not!
On a serious note, what a let down, having the accused walk free.
Typical *justice* I reckon!
As for the eBay dispute, that's just disgraceful :-(
x
Oddly, I'm more surprised about the eBay disappointment than the jury doodah.
Have just deferred a jury service session myself, I have it to look forward to in April now. No wonder your stomach was turning. Impressed that I get an extra 7p per day if I cycle to Lewes which is only about 25 miles away. That'll bolster the missing salary, eh?
Hen, isn't it? Do you know what's even more rubbish? I finally bit the bullet and left negative feedback for the seller. Despite ignoring every email I sent her, I received a really shitty message today asking me retract it and saying it was unfair! I appreciate that the post loses stuff, so if she'd just emailed to say that the package had been sent, I'd have written it off as lost. It was the complete lack of communications that really ticked me off.
J, maybe. I didn't think of that - I will investigate.
Lindsay, the only way the accused can be found guilty is if the majority of the jury find that there is no reasonable doubt. It was very hard. My personal feeling was that he was guilty - it was 7/8 - but the majority disagreed. I am sure his wife and children will be glad that they did.
Spiral Skies, the jury service was actually pretty stressful - I hope you find it easier than I did. I could claim reimbursment if my work refused to pay me while I was there - a massive £30 per day! I could walk there and back, so I neglected to look into the generous travel allowances.
Boo, and boo again. Booooo!
It wasn't until I read this post that I remembered my own shot at jury service - spent the whole trial coughing and sneezing, I must be allergic to thugs or something.
We dithered, and argued, and talked over every point of evidence before unanimously agreeing he was guilty as hell. Then he asked for 14 similar offences to be taken into consideration. Sigh.
Sorry to hear you couldn't defer your jury service (it was me who suggested you might be able to). Strangely the case I sat on a few years back also involved a translator which slows everything down (it's like having an echo in the room). Really tedious.
On the subject of juries, I think it's all down to group dynamics, a different set of personalities could have come together differently and produced a different verdict. I suppose it's better than trial by a judge only, but hardly perfect.
As goes Paypal - that stinks, it really does, like most I would assume you would be covered if they upheld your complaint, otherwise what is the point of using them? Like j says, if you paid with a credit card you are covered no? Worth a check.
It's only Scotland that has the "not proven" verdict, isn't it? I don't believe that the rest of the UK does. I remember there was a particularly controversial use of "not proven" in the 90's. I think it involved a poor girl from Paisley who was violently raped and murdered. The guy was clearly guilty but got off with it! From a legal perspective, it seems that Scotland is behind England. Weren't we last to decide that rape within marriage was actually (duh!) illegal?
Anon, there were a number of men on the jury who took the view that football violence was par for the course, which definitely had an impact on the verdict. But I am glad there wasn't a translator!
SM, I wasn't aware of that, but yup, definitely.
And to think how strongly Paypal tout their service as being 'safe' and how guarunteed you are against fraudulent sellers, how it makes it so easy for you to get your money back and all that sort of thing. You know they no longer allow sellers to not offer it as an option for payment methods? And they charge way over the odds to sellers for using it, but of course it's so "easy, safe and convenient" for buyers that they have the sellers by the balls.
SP, but behold, now I have the item! I am guessing the seller packaged it up double quick when Paypal contacted them about the dispute. But you're right, the whole thing is a crock.
Post a Comment
<< Home