Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 18 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1555 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 December 2023

Rona Mackay

—and that, after decades of campaigning, there is still confusion. That speaks volumes.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 December 2023

Rona Mackay

That must have been difficult.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 December 2023

Rona Mackay

You prefer 12.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 December 2023

Rona Mackay

I do not have much more to ask, but I echo my colleague Russell Findlay’s comments to you, Mr Duffy, about your campaign. It is astonishing that, even after all your work, families still do not understand what the not proven verdict is—

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 December 2023

Rona Mackay

Good morning. Joe, I want to pick up my colleague’s point about reasonable doubt. As I understand it, in order for a case to come to court, there must be reasonable evidence. If that evidence cannot be proved, the verdict must be “not guilty”. That is a simplification, but that is how I see it.

You also made a point about not knowing what the jury majority was in a not proven verdict. I had not even thought about that. As you put it, that muddies the waters even more. I agree with that.

I want to ask you both about not majorities but jury size. For the record, would you keep it at 15, or would you make it 12?

Meeting of the Parliament

First Minister’s Question Time

Meeting date: 30 November 2023

Rona Mackay

During yesterday’s debate on the 16 days of activism, we heard about the need for perpetrators of abuse and violence to change their behaviour, but we know that it continues. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that it is therefore vital that we change our justice system, including establishing a sexual offences court, so that victims of sexual abuse no longer feel that they are retraumatised by the court process, which they have told the Parliament’s Criminal Justice Committee happens to many of them?

Meeting of the Parliament

First Minister’s Question Time

Meeting date: 30 November 2023

Rona Mackay

To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to mark the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence. (S6F-02606)

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

Rona Mackay

So, when you heard jurors deliberating in the mock trials, did you hear them say, for example, “I don’t think there is enough evidence for that, so we might as well say that it is not proven.”?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

Rona Mackay

It is quite surprising to hear that juries will have to make that decision even though they do not fully understand the difference between the two verdicts. Should more training be given to juries? Is the manual adequate in that respect?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

Rona Mackay

I just wondered whether there was an easy path that you thought might be acceptable. However, I appreciate what you are saying and that we would need to ask the legal profession.