How efficient is our system of criminal trial Does it really do the basic job we ask of it—convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent It is often said that the British trail system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice. The lawyers on each side are so engrosses in playing hard to win, challenging each other and the judge on technical points, that the object of finding out the truth is almost forgotten. All the effort is concentrated on the big day, on the dramatic cross examination of the key witnesses in front of the jury. Critics like to compare our "adversarial" system (resembling two adversaries engaged in a contest) with the continental "inquisitorial" system, under which the judge plays a more important inquiring role.
In early times, in the Middle Ages, the systems of trial across Europe were’ similar. At that time trial by "ordeal"—especially a religious event--was the main way of testing gu
A. Oral evidence was unnecessary in France because the judges and prosecutors could read
B. When trial by ordeal was finally abandoned throughout Europe, trial by jury was introduced in Britain
C. In the adversarial system, it is the lawyers who play the leading roles
D. Lawyers in Britain are prepared to lie in order to win their cases
我来回答:
