by
Les May
LAST
week the Scottish First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon,
announced that for the time being the jury system for trials would be
suspended and that for an indeterminate period trials would be
conducted in the absence of a jury and the presiding judge alone
would decide the innocence or guilt of the accused.
Sturgeon
rescinded her decision after protests from the Scottish Judiciary and
members of her own party.
South
Korea was very successful in limiting the spread of the SARS-Cov-2
virus which is the causal agent of the disease Covid19. This
was done by first identifying those suffering the disease and then
tracking the whereabouts of those they had been in contact with by
locating their mobile phone. This is possible because as people move
around their phone automatically latches onto the mast transmitter
with the strongest signal and vice versa. The technology is the same
as that used by the Dutch to determine that the missile used to shoot
down Malaysia Airlines Flight 370
was moved from Russia.
Germany
has been using similar technology as part of its strategy for
limiting the spread of the virus.
Trial
by jury is the cornerstone of the English and Scottish
legal system and the implications for civil liberties of suspending
it, potentially indefinitely, are obvious, which is why suspension
was roundly condemned.
It
may be possible to justify tracking people using their mobile phone
signal in order to limit the spread of a deadly virus. How do we
ensure that its use will be discontinued after the pandemic is over?
If we cannot, there are clear implications for civil liberties.
These
are serious issues and deserve serious consideration and debate.
They are not getting it. Instead we have whingeing about examples of
heavy handed policing and nit picking about what the word ‘unwisely’
might be interpreted to mean.
During
the afternoon today the couple who live in the house behind me
invited someone round for a friendly drink. Unwise? Yes! By
being in the company of a third person they were increasing the
probability of introducing the virus into their household.
Conversely she was running the risk of catching it from them.
Infected people show no symptoms for three to five days initially and
are shedding virus particles throughout this time. There’s no
certainty in any of this. Social distancing is a matter of
reducing the probability that in any encounter one or other of the
participants will be infected with the virus and pass it on to
someone else. Ignoring it is anti-social.
It’s
not ‘rocket science’ to understand that if each infected
person on average passes the virus to more than one person, the
number of people infected will increase. If on average they pass it
on to just one person the number of people infected will remain
constant and if they pass it on to less than one person the number of
infections will decline to zero.
Scotland’s
chief medical officer Catherine Calderwood does
stupid things does not mean the rest of us have to do the same.
You
might get a chuckle out of this link, but notice how readily she
falls into the same trap of identity politics herself.
************************
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment