So why did you say I was wrong to state that the Supreme Court was the highest criminal court in the UK? Scottish law is irrelevant, the question is about UK law.
It is the highest court in the land.
But because of our interesting history it is not the final court of appeal for Scottish criminal matters- as it states clearly on its own website:
“The Supreme Court:
•is the final court of appeal for all United Kingdom civil cases, and criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland”
Note that it says that it is the final court for civil cases for the whole UK, but omits Scotland from the list of jurisdictions for which it is the final court of appeal for criminal cases in Scotland.
You should probably contact the relevant criminal justice organisation to do something about whoever is forcing you to read this. Perhaps your experience will be enlightening.
Finally. And we’re done.
I contacted them and it turns out that I DON’T have to keep reading. Thanks for the tip!
There are three separate criminal court systems in the UK. Those of ‘England and Wales’ converge to an appeal to the Supreme Court. That of Scotland converges only on the appeal court of the HCJ which is the highest court in the UK for Scottish criminal matters.
It states clearly on the SC website that the SC does not hear Scottish criminal appeals:
“The Supreme Court:
•is the final court of appeal for all United Kingdom civil cases, and criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland”
Note that it says that it is the final court for civil cases for the whole UK, but omits Scotland from the list of jurisdictions for which it is the final court of appeal for criminal cases in Scotland.
Again you misquote by partial quotation. I said:
"It is the highest court in the land.
But because of our interesting history it is not the final court of appeal for Scottish criminal matters"- as it states clearly on its own website:
“The Supreme Court:
•is the final court of appeal for all United Kingdom civil cases, and criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland”
Note that it says that it is the final court for civil cases for the whole UK, but omits Scotland from the list of jurisdictions for which it is the final court of appeal for criminal cases in Scotland.
Logically it is possible for it to be, for most purposes, the highest court, yet have no responsibility for a particular area. That is in fact the case at it states quite clearly on its website.
Anyone else like haggis pakora?
attempts to encourage wider engagement
Further education:
- The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction in civil appeals and criminal appeals
The Supreme Court is the highest court of appeal in relation to Scottish civil cases. The general rule is that civil appeals come to the Supreme Court as of right, subject to certification by two counsel that the notice of appeal is reasonable. Civil appeals may involve the determination of an issue of human rights law, which may be in the form of a ‘devolution issue’.
In Scottish criminal cases, the High Court of Justiciary sitting as an appeal court is the final court of appeal. Its decisions are not subject to review by the Supreme Court, which reflects Scotland’s distinctive tradition of criminal law and procedure. However, there is one limited exception to this rule: the Supreme Court may consider ‘devolution issues’ arising in Scottish criminal cases. Some devolution issues arising in criminal cases have now become ‘compatibility issues’ under the 2012 Act. However, it remains the case that the Supreme Court may not review the decisions of the High Court simply on matters of Scots criminal law.
https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/jurisdiction-of-the-supreme-court-in-scottish-appeals.pdf.
Once again showing that the SC has no standing in criminal cases in Scotland, save those limited cases of Devo,ution or Treaty compatibility.
Never tried it, I’m not a Luskentyrian.
It will be noted that Steophan continues with his sophistry and misquotes and fails to provide and support for his erroneous beliefs.
Despite my provision of copious cites from various sources including the Supreme Court’s own webpage, he has not produced an iota of evidence to show that, save for very limited administrative Devolution an ECHR compliance issues) the Supreme Court has no standing in Scottish Criminal Law.
I do apologise to others, but this site is meant to be dedicated to opposing ignorance and Steophan here is encouraging it by his sophistry and failure to support his arguments.
It is important that the truth be known.
Pjen is there, in you mind, any amount of repeating yourself where you actually give up trying to “educate” Steophan? I mean you jumped right in after a month’s suspension so clearly there’s a high threshold here but if he never stopped disagreeing would you post rebuttals for the rest of your life?
I’ve never attempted to claim that the SC has standing in Scottish criminal law, nor argued with any of your claims that it does, and I’ve no idea why you continue to claim that I have.
The only thing I disagree with pjen about is that I’ve made any claims about the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction in Scotland. I haven’t. And yet she still attempts to argue me into a position I already hold, for reasons yet to be explained.
It is his technique of sophistry I am trying to counter. Previously we have crossed swords like this twice and he argues points that are provably false persistently even in the face of repeated contrary cites, yet never attempts to build his own argument from cites to factual material, relying on partial quotes, misquotes or misinterpretations. His technique is to try to win an argument by obduracy rather than the building of a case.
On the previous two occasions he has driven me to distraction and I responded in a way that got me warned and then suspended. I decided that should he continue his puerile game playing, I would respond with a completely straight bat and merely overturn his weak arguments by the provision of cites to build a convincing argument to expose his techniques.
What I am stating is simple fact backed up by reliable cites. I hope people can see that he is merely posting his incorrect beliefs without any external supports.
Hahaha, I totally forgot about that as I rest on my Sitting Board.
What incorrect belief are you accusing me of posting?
That there is an appeal on a matter of law (not related to devolution or the ECHR) from the Court of Appeal of the High Court of the Judiciary to the Supreme Court, thus claiming that the SC is the final arbiter of Scottish Criminal Law, and superior in standing to the Appeal Court.
I had forgotten my Whit.
Nope, never claimed that. I’ve made no claims at all about the Supreme Court’s role in Scotland, which is why it’s so strange that you keep providing cite after cite for things I’ve firstly agreed with each time you’ve posted them, and secondly which have no relation to the claim I actually did make.
Which is that the Supreme Court is the highest criminal court in the UK.
A statement which remains true, and one that you have yet to attempt to disprove, for some reason.