Don't cheat, use a gun
HOW ELSE, then? Mrs Mo Mowtem, blonde bombshell of Labour's prawn cock- tail offensive in the City, has reported as saying that to help the prosecution score more goals, the goalposts should be moved wider apart. In fraud cases, the prosecution should be relieved of the burden of proof, and need only meet the standards of civil lawsuits, which are decided on the balance of probabilities. She must have bitten on a bad prawn. Already, defendants on fraud charges are at disadvantages not suffered by those accused of rape, murder or trea- son. For them the 'right of silence' does not exist. The Serious Fraud Office has special powers to require them to answer its ques- tions. Inspectors of the Department of Trade and Industry can cross-examine them on oath, unconstrained by the rules and conventions of the courts. Refusal to answer will count as contempt. Evidence given to inspectors can be produced at a trial — and was in fact the strongest evi- dence in the first Guinness trial, where the chief prosecution witness was a self-con- fessed perjuror. Lord Roskill's committee of inquiry into fraud trials would have gone further still, refusing defendants the right to trial by jury, and substituting a judge with qualified assessors. The moral is obvi- ous. If you are planning to rob a bank, don't use a document, use a gun — you'll get a much better deal.
Previous page
