Crosswords2 mins ago
Muslim juror who refused to take veil off is ordered to stand down
http://www.dailymail....cial-expressions.html
I’ve just been watching a discussion about this on The Wright Stuff. Apparently this woman was wearing western clothing, but had her face covered. Was the judge right or wrong to dismiss her?
I’ve just been watching a discussion about this on The Wright Stuff. Apparently this woman was wearing western clothing, but had her face covered. Was the judge right or wrong to dismiss her?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Zeuhl, what has "communication" to do with a court case? The jury decides the facts, the judge applies the law; for what purpose does the judge have to see the jurors' expressions?
I'm well aware that uncovered faces are the norm in Britain (though it's not universal - for motorcyclists, for instance, it's the opposite) but when did it become a legal requirement? And why exactly? In what way would a niqab have made this woman a bad juror?
I'm well aware that uncovered faces are the norm in Britain (though it's not universal - for motorcyclists, for instance, it's the opposite) but when did it become a legal requirement? And why exactly? In what way would a niqab have made this woman a bad juror?
<<what has "communication" to do with a court case?>>
Well that's a silly thing to ask as the whole point of a court is the communication of evidence from witnesses, engagement with the jury by counsel and the jury's interpretation of it all.
What next in High Court jno? Mute Barristers?
Everyone involved in the case had the right to be able to gauge the juror's reactions to the proceedings.
If you were on trial,you would probably be concerned and ask your defence team to bring it to the judge's attention, if a juror scowled at you throughout proceedings or indeed grinned at you!
Referring to my earlier post, perhaps you would not objecy if all the members of the jury deciding your fate were wearing masks or hoods.
Well that's a silly thing to ask as the whole point of a court is the communication of evidence from witnesses, engagement with the jury by counsel and the jury's interpretation of it all.
What next in High Court jno? Mute Barristers?
Everyone involved in the case had the right to be able to gauge the juror's reactions to the proceedings.
If you were on trial,you would probably be concerned and ask your defence team to bring it to the judge's attention, if a juror scowled at you throughout proceedings or indeed grinned at you!
Referring to my earlier post, perhaps you would not objecy if all the members of the jury deciding your fate were wearing masks or hoods.
Haven't read all the posts on this thread - but has anyone considered that this may not have been a Muslim woman at all?
I ask, because I've never seen a Muslim woman wearing a veil, but in Western clothes.
Is it not possible that this wasn't Aisha Ahmed from Birmingham, but Alison Archer from Chipping Norton?
I ask, because I've never seen a Muslim woman wearing a veil, but in Western clothes.
Is it not possible that this wasn't Aisha Ahmed from Birmingham, but Alison Archer from Chipping Norton?
Gromit
/// * A mate of mine was excused Jury Service due to his religious beliefs, he was a Jahovah's Witness. * ///
/// This woman has effective done the same. ///
Not exactly, I don't suppose your mate turned up to court and then suddenly announced he was a Jehovah Witness.
No, he would have most likely had to apply beforehand for exemption from Jury Service.
To all those that posted that they could see nothing wrong in this woman having her face covered I say this, "perhaps there is no reason why any of the jury need to be on open display, perhaps they could all stay in the jury room, to hear the evidence and then ring in their verdict by telephone"?
/// * A mate of mine was excused Jury Service due to his religious beliefs, he was a Jahovah's Witness. * ///
/// This woman has effective done the same. ///
Not exactly, I don't suppose your mate turned up to court and then suddenly announced he was a Jehovah Witness.
No, he would have most likely had to apply beforehand for exemption from Jury Service.
To all those that posted that they could see nothing wrong in this woman having her face covered I say this, "perhaps there is no reason why any of the jury need to be on open display, perhaps they could all stay in the jury room, to hear the evidence and then ring in their verdict by telephone"?
just curious, but why does it always have to be thick black cloth? why do they never wear netty or sheer material - that you can see through? or even 'string vest type stuff?
... does it actually have to render them totally hidden or is it more the 'act' of wearing a 'cloth' on their heads that is important to them?
... does it actually have to render them totally hidden or is it more the 'act' of wearing a 'cloth' on their heads that is important to them?
I certainly would not want this lot on my jury.
http://www.thenationa...201010701039884AR.jpg
http://www.thenationa...201010701039884AR.jpg
The black garb doesn`t bother me TBH. I deal with ladies in black garb at work. They`re fine with me. I always make eye contact and they respond. I don`t think male colleagues should press the case with the eye contact though. The reason they hide their faces is so that men can`t see them (as opposed to anyone seeing them as previously mentioned). Some of the older Arab women wear a sort of gold metal frame over the exposed part of their faces. I do find that they look slightly sinister however.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.