SCOTLAND'S "damaging and confusing" verdict of not proven in criminal trials must be scrapped, Douglas Ross has said.
The Scottish Conservative leader said the controversial verdict “serves no useful purpose in a modern justice system”.
He said many who have "suffered the horror of serious crime" have then gone on to have their "pain compounded" by the verdict, which results in the accused being able to walk free.
Scotland is the only part of the UK where juries can return three verdicts at the end of a trial: guilty, not guilty or not proven.
The Scottish Tories will include a pledge to abolish the verdict in their manifesto for next year's Holyrood elections.
The move was welcomed by the father of murdered teenager Amanda Duffy, who was killed in 1992.
Francis Auld was tried for the murder of the 19-year-old but was acquitted after the jury found the case against him not proven.
Joe Duffy said: "Myself and my family are delighted the Scottish Conservatives are including a proposed change to the three-verdict system in their manifesto and advocating to end the contentious not proven verdict.
"The return of a not proven verdict exacerbates the trauma and loss for victims and their families.
"It is misunderstood, unnecessary and out of date.We sincerely hope there will be cross-party support in the Scottish Parliament for this proposal for the benefit of everyone affected by the criminal justice system."
The Tory commitment was also welcomed by a woman known as Miss M, who successfully sued a man cleared of raping her for damages in the civil courts.
She said: "I began the End Not Proven campaign in collaboration with Rape Crisis Scotland two years ago this week.
"I am pleased to see political parties recognising this issue.
"I have met with each party and expressed my concerns to the First Minister and hope to see continued support.
"We have the evidence and Scotland's survivors and their families have spoken out. It's time to end the use of not proven - a misunderstood acquittal verdict which causes untold damage."
Mr Ross said his party was "fully committed to scrapping not proven".
Speaking as the Scottish Conservatives' virtual conference got under way, he added: "Many people who have suffered the horror of serious crime have had their pain compounded by this damaging and confusing verdict.
"Having examined this issue in detail, and having listened to victims, it clearly serves no useful purpose in a modern justice system.
"The time is right for Scotland to give jurors the clear choice between guilty and not guilty."
Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf said: "The Scottish Government-commissioned independent jury research, published in October 2019, is the largest and most realistic of its kind ever undertaken in the UK and the first mock jury research to consider Scotland's unique jury system with 15 jurors, three verdicts (including not proven) and a simple majority.
"I have made it very clear that reform of the three-verdict system must be given serious consideration, particularly due to the confusion caused to some jurors by having two acquittal verdicts.
"Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, a broad range of stakeholder events were under way to seek views on all of the findings and any implications for criminal justice reforms.
"This work has now resumed and we will publish a summary of these discussions in due course.
"I note with interest the position of the Scottish Conservatives. I have committed to engaging further with all opposition parties to hear their views on the subject."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel