Member

Secondly, an assumption is all that it is. It can be argued out. The evidence for the change is that the Chris Kaba case shows that judges can get it wrong. Perhaps they, like all of us, can make mistakes. More importantly, how do you prove that there is a genuine threat when someone is charged? There is no such thing as perfect intelligence about whether these things will happen. We saw in the second Iraq war that intelligence is a variable feast. It is people analysing information they have to give their best assessment of whether a threat exists. Surely we should give some leeway to the officer in the case. It is not only about them but about their families. Their families go through this for years as well; they live at the same address. Their kids go to the same schools. They are affected by it.