I find it interesting to see that the juror charged of contempt of court for listening to music on her MP3 player whilst in court on jury duty has been cleared despite two witnesses stating they heard music from under her headscarf.
I find this especially interesting in contrast with the fact that less than a year ago a man in Wales was convicted and punished on the basis of no evidence and no victim.
In the case of the juror, who was cleared, we have this comment from the judge who dismissed her:
Judge Chapple said at the time he had discharged Khanom because: "There was a complaint made by a fellow juror during the course of the luncheon adjournment.
"The juror had seen wires disappearing into the juror in question’s headscarf and heard her music emanating from that juror while we were in court and everyone else listening with close attention to important evidence of the defendant."
"A member of the defence team had also noticed the wires. I said during the course of submissions I thought I heard the characteristic tinny sound of music from headphones fleetingly."
Two witnesses. Two instances of evidence.
However, in the case of the man in Wales, we have this:
McGlynn, 40, was convicted after the only witness to the incident, Lydia Rees saw him shouting abuse at a traditionally-clothed Asian woman in the Hafod area of Swansea on 13 June this year.
Mrs Rees, 43, told magistrates she was shocked to hear him shout "Sieg Heil" and other abuse at the woman through his open car window.
She told the court: "He was shouting. To me it appeared that he was being venomous. His face appeared quite contorted.
She added: "But I could not swear to the words I did hear."
Got that? "I could not swear to the words…" And the victim? Nowhere to be found. Nowhere. Yet Mr McGlynn was convicted and Taha Idris of the Swansea Bay Racial (in)Equality Council said:
"I would congratulate this woman for being strong and coming forward. She’s seen it as her duty as a citizen.
"I would ask other people to do the same – without witnesses cases like this fall apart."
So now we know. It is your duty as a citizen to persecute and have charged and convicted men you suspect may have said words of which you disapprove. (Which is for some reason a crime, why is this by the way?)
A pity it’s no-one’s duty as a citizen to take jury duty seriously enough to turn up on time and pay attention to the trial. I mean come on, it’s not impossible to remove earplugs without removing a headscarf, surely?
So the question is, what on earth is going on with the legal and judicial systems in this country?