Rush to judgment

I'm always a bit sceptical of court case verdicts. They're generally treated as hard fact, although in reality they're merely the considered opinion of a judge or jury.

The media in particular treat all verdicts as gospel, and deliver screaming headlines on the basis of judgments that may or may not be the ultimate truth.

Many many people who have been found guilty by a court turn out to be innocent years later, often after they've been in prison for lengthy periods.

I'm thinking right now of Lucy Letby, the nurse who was convicted of the murder of seven infants and the attempted murder of seven others. She was sentenced to life imprisonment, but many commentators have questioned the verdict and want a retrial on the basis of evidence that wasn't produced at the court. So was she guilty or has this been a miscarriage of justice? The arguments continue.

It seems to me that at the end of the day the soundness of the verdict isn't a question of  whether it was reached by a judge or a jury. The crucial factor is surely the strength of the evidence presented by each side. If the prosecution evidence is strongest, they win. Ditto the defence evidence.

I've been on a jury twice, and it seemed very clear to me that it's the strength of the evidence that counts. My first case was a black guy accused of assaulting a police officer. We started off thinking he was innocent but after a long deliberation decided he was guilty. Of course I've no idea if he was actually guilty or not. Only he knows the answer to that.

The fact is that supposedly solid "final" verdicts are regularly overturned as "unsafe".

To pee or not to pee

You'd think there would be plenty of public toilets in Belfast city centre. With so many people coming and going, including an increasing number of tourists, that seems like an obvious thing to offer.

In fact you'd be hard-pressed to find a public toilet anywhere in the city centre. If I need a toilet, I know of just one council-provided one - in the city hall. Otherwise my only option is commercial premises - like Marks and Spencer or a coffee shop. Or maybe a hotel.

There are lots of people with medical issues that call for rapid access to a toilet, but they must have kittens trying to find one.

Lots of councils have closed their public toilets to save money - and maybe because they're often used for drug-dealing.

Raymond Martin, Director of the British Toilet Association (yes, really) is trying to reverse this trend and persuade councils to reopen toilets they've closed, or even open new ones. I'm not sure he'll get very far in the current economic climate, but he's plugging away nonetheless.

He's also touring the country inspecting public toilets and giving them a star rating. The best ones (smart, hygienic, accessible etc) get five stars, the worst one star (if they're lucky).

With thousands of people pouring into Belfast from cruise ships, I would have thought there's an urgent need for more public toilets, but clearly Belfast Council is unconvinced.

Oops daisy

Some people not only hate to make mistakes, but hate other people to know they've made mistakes. They'll do anything to cover up their cock-ups, even if that involves fingering innocent people.

Politicians and public bodies do it all the time of course, but so do many ordinary individuals who hate to be caught out in any way.

I left my last job after my boss accused me of releasing confidential documents to a civil servant. I pointed out that the documents were already freely available on our website, but he wouldn't listen. He sent me a three-page email accusing me of not doing my job properly, not obeying instructions and so on.

If only he could have admitted I was right and he was wrong, there wouldn't have been any problem. But no, he had to insist I was the one who'd screwed up.

The famous neurosurgeon Henry Marsh admits that in his early days as a brain surgeon he was somewhat arrogant and self-satisfied and wouldn't admit he'd been at fault at all. It was only later on in his career that he admitted making mistakes or misjudgments, and his ex-patients appreciated his honesty.

My prostate operation apparently went very well, but if it hadn't and the surgeon had made some bad mistake, I would have expected him to be frank with me, and not cover up and pretend everything went fine (if he'd done so, I probably would have smelt a rat anyway).

What exactly is wrong with admitting mistakes? It's only by freely examining your mistakes that you learn lessons and become a better person. I'm happy to acknowledge my mistakes and whatever they might teach me.

Pic: Henry Marsh

How are your eyes?

The British government plans to tighten up on road safety, in particular introducing vision tests for older drivers, who are responsible for a large number of road casualties.

We're one of only three European countries to rely on self-reporting of eyesight problems that affect driving. As I'm over 70, I have to renew my driving licence every three years, and eyesight wise, all I have to do is declare that my eyesight is good enough for driving. I don't need to pass any official test, whatever I say is assumed to be totally honest.

I'm all in favour of a compulsory eye test. There must be lots of elderly drivers falsely claiming adequate vision, and they may be causing horrific accidents. People who live deep in the countryside and have little or no public transport may very well lie about their vision because they're very car-dependent.

Still, it's not something I need worry about just yet. I have to renew my licence next March and nothing is likely to change before then. I needn't worry again about my vision for another three years, by which time I may very well have decided to stop driving anyway. Also the new laws might only apply in England and Wales.

And because there are so many people in rural parts of Northern Ireland who're dependent on their cars but might fail an eye test, there could be pressure on the NI government not to introduce one, however much it's needed.

Manchester

Jenny and I have been in Manchester for a week. We had heard good things about the city so we thought we'd suss it out. We had high expectations but in the end it was disappointing.

We thought it had no individuality, no character, nothing to distinguish it. We could have been in any big city anywhere. Lots of people, lots of shops, lots of skyscrapers, and that was it.

The only things that stood out were the museums and art galleries, which had lots of interesting stuff in them. And the friendliness of everyone we spoke to.

Our first day wasn't too promising. It was pouring with rain in the morning and some of the tram stops were suspended. There was a bus replacement service but it didn't go anywhere near our destination, the Imperial War Museum, so we had to walk the rest of the way in steady rain. At least the rest of the week was dry and sunny.

On Wednesday we met some old friends of ours in Chester for a catch-up. which was most enjoyable. Chester actually has more character than Manchester, what with the river and the city walls.

One very noticeable thing about Manchester is the multiculturalism. There were masses of brown and black faces and (apparently) nobody seeing it as anything unusual. Quite a contrast with the rest of the UK where there's still a lot of violent racism.

But we won't be going back to Manchester. It was too anonymous, too functional. We'll stick to our old haunts in future.

A short break

Back soon!

Nick at what remains of the Berlin Wall

August 2014