Proceeding contribution from Jack Straw (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Coroners and Justice Bill
My hon. Friend is arguing about what was in the Bill, not what the Government are now proposing. Given the experience of the de Menezes case, it seems to me that no judge faced with a similar set of circumstances will agree to dispensing with a jury, because plainly a satisfactory inquest was conducted with a jury in the de Menezes case. I would ask my hon. Friend to take account of what is now proposed, not what was in the Bill.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 490 c88
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Children Disclosure of information Admissibility of evidence Data protection Crime prevention Courts Armed forces Death Coroners Juries Evidence Judges Legal representation Immunity certificates Foreign relations National security Northern Ireland Protection Parliamentary scrutiny Public inquiries Scotland Standards Terrorism Witnesses High Court
- Legislation
- Coroners and Justice Bill 2008-09
- Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:54:05 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543427
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543427
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543427