
A Quiet Evening’s Reading: ‘Notable British Trials’ - dangerman
https://www.city-journal.org/html/quiet-evenings-reading-15844.html
======
docdeek
>> He was found guilty of the second charge; but on the first, he received the
peculiarly Scottish verdict of “not proven.”

This is an interesting alternative to the binary guilty/not guilty verdict.
Notably, Senator Arlen Specter wanted to vote "not proven" on Bill Clinton's
impeachment:

"Juries in criminal cases under the laws of Scotland have three possible
verdicts: guilty, not guilty, not proven. Given the option in this trial, I
suspect that many Senators would choose 'not proven' instead of 'not guilty'.
That is my verdict: not proven. The President has dodged perjury by calculated
evasion and poor interrogation. Obstruction of justice fails by gaps in the
proofs."

[http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/12/senate...](http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/12/senate.statements/specter.html)

~~~
gadders
Juries in Scotland also have 15 people, not 12.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_by_jury_in_Scotland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_by_jury_in_Scotland)

~~~
docdeek
I grew up in Australia where a jury consists of 12 people. I've lived in
France for the last 12 years, though, and here the jury (when there is one) it
will typically be either 6 or 9 citizens. One of the overseas territories uses
a jury system that only has 4 people, and then expands to 6 on appeal. It
would be interesting to understand how the 'Anglo Saxon' system (outside of
Scotland, it seems) settled on 12 people.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
It wouldn't surprise me to find it's based on the twelve apostles, that Jesus
Christ used as his witnesses.

------
zokier
If you are interested in more literary variation of the theme, "His Bloody
Project" by Burnet is pretty nice read. It essentially describes the
proceedings of (a fictional) 19th century Scottish murder trial. It is well
researched, and plenty of things from the article sounded familiar from it.

------
ranko
Some of the great historical and contemporary speeches are given at trials -
think of Nelson Mandela's defence when on trial for his life as a fine
example. The closing speeches in a criminal trial are an opportunity for
oratory as a persuasive art.

------
xcavier
‘Not guilty’ does not mean innocent. It means only that the prosecution has
failed to prove the accused’s/defendant’s guilt to the requisite standard of
proof.

~~~
pc86
If that were true then wouldn't the concept of double jeopardy not exist?

~~~
asfdsfggtfd
The UK has been phasing this out..

~~~
asfdsfggtfd
To the downvoter. I'm sorry you don't like this (I don't either) but you can't
downvote away facts.

------
kwhitefoot
That was a good read, thanks.

