Indictment trials to be conducted by judge sitting WITHOUT JURY under #Coronavirus (Scotland) Bill-The late Lord Denning said ‘juries are the lamp that shows that freedom lives’. Fair & impartial trial by jury of one's peers is sacred right enshrined in our justice system 1/14⚖️ 
Whilst Govt will state this is temporary & to allay backlog of serious trials-it is more likely such steps will not stop delays- an accused will want a jury, some witnesses will not be willing to attend & what about murder victim’s families who wish to be present? Dangerous step
Our courts are not set up with technology to conduct such trials remotely, many individuals may well need to self-isolate, others may be ill in the coming months, questions will arise about preserving integrity of evidence that can only be done in court
The idea that some how judges who have spent years on the bench will all of a sudden be able to put aside their own prejudices or beliefs on how a trial should have been conducted had they been doing it is exactly why we need juries
Why is there this panic on such trials other than the question of custody time limits being extended and opposed - the Govt should have considered this as an option rather than thinking getting rid of juries is the way forward
Trial by juries goes back centuries- Under Magna Carta the King could not imprison a freeman without being convicted by a trial of his peers (1215)
Clause 39 of Magna Carta became the foundation of the idea that a freeman could not be imprisoned without first being found guilty in a trial by his peers. This later became the idea behind the principle of “trial by jury”
Juries have been the jewel in the crown of our legal system- juries are not afraid of scrutinising the process to which are contributing and reflect society rather than the views of white upper middle class judge
The jury system is a vital safeguard to powers of the state. For centuries the jury trials have ensured citizens maintain some significant control over the operation of that most draconian of state powers.
The trial-by-jury system is a process of an accused being judged by his or her peers. A juror’s ability to judge a fellow citizen’s guilt arises in virtue of their own experience of the world.
Removing juries would cause a fundamental shift in the way we administer justice. It would dilute the principle that justice is passed in the name of all people, irrespective of education, wealth or status. So why should this be allowed even if only for 6 months ?
It would sever the link between the courtroom & the people the justice system purports to serve- such a step whilst packaged as necessary but is a slippery path & some in the legal establishment have been demanding privately for years
Even if we concentrate on victim rights rather than the accused, what guarantees are there that a murder victims family members and friends will be able to observe justice being done? There appears to be no real measures directed at ensuring this
I suspect tall political parties will agree to this, the public will lack sympathy on the issue of juries but we should remember presumption of innocence until proven guilty- would you rather a high court judge or a jury decided your fate if you were accused of a serious crime?
How can the defence prepare for such trials, with inability of meeting experts,witnesses, getting access to productions, evidence, cctv viewing, this regressive step of abolition of juries &trying to allow such trials to proceed is dragging us into third world justice
