Connect with us

Published

on

MSPs have voted to abolish Scotland’s controversial not proven verdict.

The Scottish government’s flagship Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill was passed on Wednesday following a lengthy debate of more than 160 amendments that began the day before.

The new legislation makes a series of changes to the justice system, including scrapping the not proven verdict; establishing a specialist sexual offences court; creating a victims and witnesses commissioner; reforming the jury process to require a two-thirds majority for conviction; and implementing Suzanne’s Law which will require the parole board to take into account if a killer continues to refuse to reveal where they hid their victim’s body.

Following Royal Assent, the legislation will be implemented in phases.

Justice Secretary Angela Constance and First Minister John Swinney. Pic: PA
Image:
Justice Secretary Angela Constance and First Minister John Swinney. Pic: PA

Justice Secretary Angela Constance said: “This historic legislation will put victims and witnesses at the heart of a modern and fair justice system.

“By changing culture, process and practice across the system, it will help to ensure victims are heard, supported, protected and treated with compassion, while the rights of the accused will continue to be safeguarded.

“This legislation, which builds on progress in recent years, has been shaped by the voices of victims, survivors, their families and support organisations, and it is testimony to their tireless efforts to campaign for further improvement.

More on Scotland

“I am grateful to those who bravely shared their experiences to inform the development of this legislation and pave a better, more compassionate path for others.”

Not proven verdict

Currently, juries in Scotland have three verdicts open to them when considering the evidence after a trial, and can find an accused person either guilty or not guilty, or that the case against them is not proven.

Like not guilty, the centuries-old not proven verdict results in an accused person being acquitted.

Critics have argued it can stigmatise a defendant by appearing not to clear them, while failing to provide closure for the alleged victim.

Notable cases which resulted in a not proven verdict include Sir Hugh Campbell and Sir George Campbell, who were tried for high treason in 1684 for being present at the Battle of Bothwell Bridge.

The murder of Amanda Duffy, 19, in South Lanarkshire in 1992 sparked a national conversation around the existence of the not proven verdict and double jeopardy rules.

Suspect Francis Auld stood trial but the case was found not proven by a jury and an attempt to secure a retrial failed in 2016. Auld died the following year.

In 2018, a sexual assault case against former television presenter John Leslie was found not proven.

And in 2020, former first minister Alex Salmond was found not guilty on 12 sexual assault charges, while one charge of sexual assault with intent to rape was found not proven.

Victim Support Scotland (VSS) had earlier urged MSPs to put aside party politics and vote “for the intention of the bill”.

Kate Wallace, chief executive of VSS, believes the act is a “solid foundation” on which to build further improvements.

She added: “The passing of this act represents a momentous occasion for Scotland’s criminal justice system.

“It marks a significant step towards creating a system that considers and prioritises the needs of people impacted by crime.”

VSS worked with the families of Arlene Fraser and Suzanne Pilley to spearhead Suzanne’s Law.

Ms Fraser was murdered by estranged husband Nat Fraser in 1998, while Ms Pilley was killed by David Gilroy in 2010. To date, the women’s bodies have never been recovered.

Before the bill, parole board rules dictated that a killer’s refusal to disclose the information “may” be taken into account.

The new legislation means parole boards “must” take the refusal to cooperate into account.

(L-R) Suzanne's Law campaigners Isabelle Thompson and Carol Gillies, the mum and sister of Arlene Fraser, alongside Gail Fairgrieve and Sylvia Pilley, the sister and mum of Suzanne Pilley. Pic: PA
Image:
(L-R) Suzanne’s Law campaigners Isabelle Thompson and Carol Gillies, the mum and sister of Arlene Fraser, alongside Gail Fairgrieve and Sylvia Pilley, the sister and mum of Suzanne Pilley. Pic: PA

Carol Gillies, sister of Ms Fraser, and Gail Fairgrieve, sister of Ms Pilley said: “We have done everything possible to make this change to parole in memory of Arlene and Suzanne, and for other people who have lost their lives in such a horrific way.

“For our families, the passing of this act and the change to parole are momentous.”

Read more from Sky News:
Why next year’s Scottish elections could get messy

The Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour voted against the bill.

Although in support of the abolition of the not proven verdict, the Scottish Tories said they had been left with no alternative but to oppose the bill after the SNP rejected a series of amendments.

The party had called for a Scotland-only grooming gangs inquiry; wanted victims to be told if a decision was taken not to prosecute an accused; and for all victims to be informed if a plea deal was struck between defence and prosecution lawyers.

They also wanted Suzanne’s Law to be strengthened, which would have compelled killers to reveal the location of their victim’s body or risk having their parole rejected – ensuring “no body, no release”.

MSP Liam Kerr, shadow justice secretary, said: “This half-baked bill sells the victims of crime desperately short.

“By ignoring many of the key demands of victims’ groups, the SNP have squandered the chance for a long overdue rebalancing of Scotland’s justice system.

“The Scottish Conservatives’ common sense amendments would have given this legislation real teeth but, by rejecting them, the nationalists have delivered a victims’ bill in name only.

“While we back the abolition of the not proven verdict, the SNP’s intransigence on a number of key issues meant we could not support this bill in its final form.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Twenty warnings for Sir Keir Starmer from new deputy leader Lucy Powell

Published

on

By

Twenty warnings for Sir Keir Starmer from new deputy leader Lucy Powell

Labour’s new deputy leader Lucy Powell promised to be Sir Keir Starmer’s ally.

Yet in her victory speech she criticised his government and its record no fewer than 20 times. And told him to raise his game, or else.

Politics live: Follow for updates as Labour names new deputy leader

Here’s what she said – and what she meant:

  1. “Division and hate are on the rise. Discontent and disillusionment widespread.” What she meant: The Labour government has been a huge disappointment.
  2. “The desire for change is impatient and palpable.” What she meant: You’ve had 16 months to deliver change – voters are saying, “Get on with it”.
  3. “We have to offer hope, to offer the big change the country’s crying out for.” What she meant: Stop tinkering. Get more radical. You’ve got a huge Commons majority, after all.
  4. “We must give a stronger sense of purpose, whose side we’re on and of our Labour values and beliefs.” What she meant: We’re not doing enough for working people or tackling inequality.
  5. “People feel that this government is not being bold enough in delivering the kind of change we promised.” What she meant: Our voters are deserting us because they don’t see change.
  6. “I’ll be a champion for all Labour values and boldness in everything we do.” What she meant: Watch out! I’m going to hound you and hold your feet to the fire!
  7. “We won’t win by trying to out-Reform Reform, but by building a broad progressive consensus.” What she meant: Stop the lurch to the Right on immigration. We’re better than that.
  8. “It starts with wrestling back the political megaphone and setting the agenda more strongly.” What she meant: We need to sharpen up our communication and selling our message.
  9. “We’ve let Farage and his ilk run away with it.” What she meant: The Reform UK leader is running rings round us in communicating and campaigning. We’re too sluggish and flat-footed.
  10. “For too long the country and the economy has worked in the interests of the few and not the many.” What she meant: Winter fuel payment cuts were a disaster and the two-child benefit cap has to go.
  11. “Trickle down economics hasn’t worked.” What she meant: No more tax cuts for the rich. It’s time for a wealth tax, for example, to redistribute wealth.
  12. “Life has just got harder and harder, less and less secure in work, in housing, in making ends meet.” What she meant: We’re failing to tackle the cost of living crisis and housing shortages.
  13. “The deep-seated inequalities that have widened in wealth in regions in class in health need fundamentally redressing.” What she meant: We’re failing to look after our “red wall” voters.
  14. “Re-unite our voter coalition and re-unite the country.” What she meant: Start governing for everyone, urban and rural, rich and poor, North and South. Stop neglecting poorer regions.
  15. “We need to step up.” What she meant: For goodness sake, sort out the chaos in 10 Downing. Stop blaming aides and civil servants and sacking them. Get a grip!
  16. Members and affiliates “don’t feel part of the conversation or party of the movement right now. And we have to change that.” What she meant: Stop ignoring and alienating activists, MPs and unions.
  17. “Unity and loyalty comes from collective purpose, not from command and control.” What she meant: Stop the control freakery in parliament and party management. It’ll backfire.
  18. “Debating, listening and hearing is not dissent. It’s all strength.” What she meant: Listen to your backbenchers and stop suspending them when they vote against policies like welfare cuts.
  19. “As your deputy, my commitment is to change the culture.” What she meant: I’m going to stand up for rebels and critics and force you to ditch the control freakery and bad decisions.
  20. “At the election 16 months ago the British people voted for change. I’m here to do everything I can to make that change a reality.” What she meant: Raise your game, or else!

Read more from Sky News:
The one thing Farage and Polanski have in common
China ‘enemy’ reference removed from witness statement

She said it all with a smile, but there was menace there.

As deputy leader, Lucy Powell was always going to be a critical friend. So there you go, prime minister. Here’s 20 things you need to do for her to be more friend than critic.

Continue Reading

Politics

Who is Labour’s new deputy leader Lucy Powell and what does she stand for?

Published

on

By

Who is Labour's new deputy leader Lucy Powell and what does she stand for?

Lucy Powell has been elected as the deputy leader of the Labour Party.

But who is she and what does she stand for?

Powell began her career in politics working for Labour MPs Glenda Jackson and Beverley Hughes.

She then worked for a pro-EU campaign group.

After that, she ran Ed Miliband’s successful Labour leadership campaign and was his deputy chief of staff until she was elected as the MP for Manchester Central in 2012.

She has been at the forefront of Labour politics for over a decade, serving under Ed Miliband, Jeremy Corbyn and Keir Starmer.

After Labour won the last general election, she was appointed as the leader of the House of Commons in Starmer’s cabinet.

But last month she was sacked in the cabinet reshuffle and came to be seen as the anti-Starmer candidate.

During the deputy leadership campaign, Powell promised to “provide a stronger, more independent voice” for members of the Labour Party.

And in her acceptance speech, she said the government hadn’t been bold enough, and that it needed to step up.

So how much of a problem is she going to be for Keir Starmer?

Her new role – and being outside the cabinet – means she will be free to criticise the government, which could make life more difficult for the prime minister.

Read More:
Lucy Powell named Labour’s new deputy leader
Powell will take a ‘submarine approach’ – for now

Powell has been outspoken about her desire for the government to lift the two child benefit cap – and also called for the country to work for the many and not the few – a Corbyn-era slogan – and that Labour must stop handing the megaphone over to Reform and letting them run away with it.

Starmer will be conscious that an MP he sacked not long ago is now in a powerful role able to speak freely and attack his decisions.

But Powell is not free from her own controversies.

In May, Lucy Powell called grooming gangs a dog whistle issue – something she later had to clarify after it caused outrage among campaigners and opposition parties.

She also vocally defended Labour’s unpopular cut to winter fuel allowance while in cabinet, before the government then U-turned on the policy – she then criticised the proposed welfare cuts after she was sacked from government.

Powell insists she wants to help Keir Starmer, providing constructive criticism and a voice for Labour members.

But will Keir Starmer see it that way?

Continue Reading

Politics

Tax hike could lead to higher food prices, supermarkets warn

Published

on

By

Tax hike could lead to higher food prices, supermarkets warn

The UK’s largest supermarkets are calling on the chancellor to exclude stores from a new business rates surtax, warning that shoppers will bear the brunt of higher prices.

Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Marks & Spencer, Waitrose, Morrisons, Asda, Aldi and Lidl are among the stores that have signed a letter addressed to Rachel Reeves, arguing that easing taxes on grocers would help curb food inflation.

Industry group the British Retail Consortium (BRC), which organised the letter, said large shops could face higher business rates if included in the government’s proposed surtax on properties valued at more than £500,000.

Smaller high street firms are expected to benefit from reduced business rates under the government’s plans.

“If the industry faces higher taxes in the coming Budget – such as being included in the new surtax on business rates – our ability to deliver value for our customers will become even more challenging, and it will be households who inevitably feel the impact,” the letter reads.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Chancellor faces tough budget choices

“Large retail premises are a tiny proportion of all stores, yet account for a third of retail’s total business rates bill – meaning another significant rise could push food inflation even higher.”

The supermarkets are asking Ms Reeves to “address retail’s disproportionate tax burden”, saying that doing so would “send a strong signal of support for the industry and of the government’s commitment to tackling food inflation”.

More on Rachel Reeves

The chancellor is widely expected to raise taxes after bleak economic forecasts and a string of reversals on welfare cuts, which have made it harder for her to stick to her borrowing limits.

Read more from Sky News:
Retail sales the highest in three years in a surprise to economists
Oilfield services group Petrofac board on standby to handle collapse

Helen Dickinson, the BRC’s chief executive, said: “Supermarkets are doing everything possible to keep food prices affordable, but it’s an uphill battle, with over £7 billion in additional costs in 2025 alone.

“From higher national insurance contributions to new packaging taxes, the financial strain on the industry is immense.”

The Treasury has been contacted for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending