I see the turd that killed Jo Yates is admitting manslaughter. I wonder why we now need to waste resources on proving murder? After all, he admits the killing and is clearly a shit deserving no leniency – he was quite prepared to allow an innocent man to suffer pain and indignity in his place. Given the lunatic incompetence of our legal system I foresee a trial screwed up, leaving it impossible to convict him of anything. Can he get a fair trial now he’s copped a plea to the lesser offence?
No news yet of substantial pay outs to that most usual of suspects – he who once had a blue rinse, later sported a pony tail and was good enough with words to ‘worry’ our Plod. Maybe they were playing eeny, meany, miney, mo with the guys next door in the absence of a black man being seen running off! Pity the Dutchman is too young to get out nodding the Lampugh case off the books, given Mr. Kipper.
I find myself coming to the view that open trials in public might be a lot better than our current system, though such a system’s main purpose would be to remove the injustices of hidden trials and hidden investigations, rather than to provide better entertainment than reality television. I know it would open up a can of worms, but I believe taking on the enemies of open society is now more important for much wider reasons.
Allcoppedout's Blog 
“I wonder why we now need to waste resources on proving murder?”
Because to do otherwise is to allow him to escape with a lesser sentence than he deserves?
I’m not sure that’s true given our loopy system. Mans laughter can pull anything from a halfpenny fine to life.