Scottish verdict

[Robin Hamilton]

From: Paul Frank
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Robin Hamilton
<robin.hamilton3 at virginmedia.com> wrote:

> I've heard it defined succinctly as: "Guilty but lucky."
>
> Robin

<<
Doesn't "guilty but lucky" just mean "scot-free"? A different kettle
of fish from "Scots verdict," which means that after careful
deliberation of the available evidence, the judge or jury concluded
that the defendant could be found neither guilty nor innocent.
>>

I think this discounts the rarity (at any time) of actual not-proven
verdicts.  The presumption was that either (a) the jury felt that the
defendant was guilty as sin, but that there wasn't quite enough evidence to
convict; or (b) the jury felt that the defendant was guilty, but would have
done the same thing in their place.

Thus, in either scenario, "guilty but lucky".  Otherwise, the usual standard
'guilty' or 'not guilty verdict' was delivered.

Robin
____________________________________________________

Scots
law recognizes that sometimes there are no black or white or easy
solutions. There's a debate in England underway about whether to
introduce a system of first and second-degree murder, based on the
recognition that not all murders are equally heinous. Life is
complicated.

Paul

Paul Frank
Translator
Chinese, German, French, Italian > English
Espace de l'Europe 16
Neuchâtel, Switzerland
paulfrank at bfs.admin.ch
paulfrank at post.harvard.edu

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org