The jury system has for hundreds of years been the guarantor of the integrity of our justice system.
To have one's guilt or innocence decided by 12 of one's fellow citizens instead of the king or government as in other countries made justice fair and eqitable and the cornerstone of our democracy.
Sometimes, especially recently the government has been thwarted in its aims by this system and moves were afoot to abolish it.
People from all walks of life and religion were obliged if called to do jury service and this task although sometimes inconvenient and irksome has helped preserve British Justice.
Now it seems there are some who are not considered fit to be jurors--members of the BNP. One of our members has been told that he is not suitable to be a jurer because of his membership of the party.
A person can be a communist, supporter of terrorism, the IRA or even a recent arrival to these shores and still be a jurer but a member of the BNP (who supports no foreign power or terrorist organisation) obviously in the eyes of the authorities would be unable to give an unbiased verdict and thus beyond the pale.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OPPOSITE SCENARIO?
Would a Labour supporter or muslim be able to be impartial to a known BNP supporter?
OR DOES JUSTICE FOR US NOT MATTER?
