Citanul
23rd January 2008, 12:40
A slightly different episode in that the focus was very much on court proceedings rather than an investigation, but still a good one. And it certainly made you wonder - judges are supposed to be impartial, but who checks up on them.
I guess that's an important issue in South Africa, where we don't have trial by jury. While there are benefits to that (a judge is better qualified to judge a case solely on its legal basis and can handle various technicalities), there can also be drawbacks.
One thing that puzzled me early on was when Elliot was being questioned about his interview with the daughter. The defence lawyer claimed that because Elliot told the mother that he was going to make sure she never saw her children again, that suggested that he influenced the daughter because he went into the interview with the opinion that the mother was guilty.
But he made that statement after the interview, so why couldn't his opnion have been formed by the interview? It seems a bit too much of a leap to make.
I guess that's an important issue in South Africa, where we don't have trial by jury. While there are benefits to that (a judge is better qualified to judge a case solely on its legal basis and can handle various technicalities), there can also be drawbacks.
One thing that puzzled me early on was when Elliot was being questioned about his interview with the daughter. The defence lawyer claimed that because Elliot told the mother that he was going to make sure she never saw her children again, that suggested that he influenced the daughter because he went into the interview with the opinion that the mother was guilty.
But he made that statement after the interview, so why couldn't his opnion have been formed by the interview? It seems a bit too much of a leap to make.