27 Sep

Accused’s right to silence questioned

first_imgStuff.co.nz 26 July 2012 A coroner’s decision implicating Chris Kahui in the deaths of his twin babies has reignited debate over a defendant’s right to silence in court. The coroner’s findings have sparked calls for a review of a defendant’s right to silence in criminal trials. Sensible Sentencing Trust founder Garth McVicar said that, had Mr Kahui been forced to take the stand at his trial, the jury may well have convicted him. “It certainly appears that way from what we’re reading now – the differences in the statements which would have been exposed on the stand. “It’s about justice. From a victim’s perspective, they honestly and genuinely believe they will get justice out of the system. But that’s happening less and less. Chief coroner Neil MacLean said that, unlike the adversarial criminal court process, the inquisitorial coronial process could compel key people to give evidence in order to establish the truth. “The reality here is the reason why Chris Kahui, A, was willing to give evidence, and B, could actually be made to give evidence, was because he could never be charged again.” The fact that Mr Evans’ findings directly contradicted Mr Kahui’s High Court acquittal raised “an interesting academic debate” about whether a defendant should be able to be retried, or compelled to take the stand. In the French system, magistrates could force people to give evidence “and draw adverse inferences” if they did not, Judge MacLean said. The right to silence is a historic safety measure to protect defendants from being compelled to provide answers through torture. It has evolved over centuries from English common law. Auckland University law professor Bill Hodge said it was time for a national debate over the modern application of the right. “It’s not a question of simply doing away with it, but it could be a question of saying: ‘No, it needs to be re-examined in modern conditions’. Justice Minister Judith Collins said there were no plans to change a defendant’s longstanding right to silence. “Making someone take the stand does not mean they will suddenly ‘crack’ under cross-examination and confess to the crime – people may not always tell the truth on the stand.” http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/7349687/Accuseds-right-to-silence-questionedlast_img read more

14 May

Animate from an APP and that the stadiums are not ’empty’

first_imgViktor Mraz, the developer of the project, has already met with several Bundesliga clubs that are receptive to installing this remote environment. However, it must still be accepted by the German Football Federation (DFB). The creators of MeinApplaus.de selected PSD Bank Arena, headquarters of FSV Frankfurt, as the test stage for the live demo.And while deciding whether to install this revolutionary invention, what is already approved is the initiative of the fans of the Colonia, that they will ‘sit’ in their stands life-size photographs of those partners who want to “accompany” their players, upon payment of 19 euros. About 6,000 “tickets” have already been reserved. The big leagues are preparing to play in the coming months without spectators in the stands, but that does not mean that there will be no atmosphere. Technology can do it. The German computer company Herzenswerk is already working on the commercialization of the MeinApplaus.de application, thanks to which Fans who are watching the game on television can interact in real time with the stadium’s public address system. Only the subscribers of the local team may activate any of the four options (applause, whistles, preset chants or goal celebration) And, logically, the sound will come out louder from the speakers the more fans press the button.last_img read more