>> Spelling error aside he is of course correct when he says that the worries how
>> the blanket overturning of convictions - done for the "best of reasons" in this case
>> - will be used as a precedent for other cases in the future. "Once the
>> dam is burst", it's unclear what process may be used in the future, he says.
>>
>> The overruling of the judiciary by Acts of Parliament may well have unintended consequences.
There is a way round this, convictions were sought by the post office under their ancient prosecutorial powers, not the CPS. Declare those powers legally flawed and convictions unsafe. Post office should have those pwers withdrawn, and if they wish to represent cases its the CPS role.
|