Four out of five cases are already tried in the absence of a jury. Diplock courts worked well so there is a tried and tested model. I think most people who’ve done jury service would say that trial by jury is less a forensic study of the evidence and more an exposition of firmly held prejudices.

Is the solution as simple as doing something philanthropic?

Four episodes down and I still haven’t a clue what’s going on.

When you get it to work it will have all the dynamism of a slug on temazepam.

Me, can’t say without embarrassing them but Mrs S’s interactions put mine to shame: FML Thompson, Joan Thirsk and AJP Taylor, who were, apparently, ‘all a delight.’

There was a document they wouldn’t produce as it was fragile - unless I agreed to pay for its conservation! I did mention with the amount I was paying for camera use they should have enough to do it themselves. The argument was lost on them. When I’m elected president, camera use will be free.

Love books. Can’t get enough. Will soon have to move house to accommodate them.

Even with an impartial SCOTUS it’s not possible without some sort of coup. The constitutional mathematics just don’t add up in the House of Representatives, Senate or States. There is unlikely to ever be another constitutional amendment.

Hope it works better than the three council debacle that is Bedfordshire.

A country run by rabid evangelicals celebrating a pagan festival. The US is get more bizarre by the day.

It was an open sewer and I’m glad to have left.