Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government

necessary or desirable. It did not consider that the system of majority verdictswas directly comparable with those in common law countries where unanimity,or near unanimity, is required for either a “guilty” or a “not guilty” verdict.Thus in these countries, failure to have a majority in favour of guilty does notlead automatically to acquittal, as it does in Scotland. Rather the elaborateprocess of a retrial may follow with all the implications that such a processmight have on accused, witnesses and victims. Furthermore, if the issue ofmajority verdicts were to be examined, a review of the three verdict system(i.e. ‘not proven’) would have to follow. The Review has been presented withno material to suggest that the majority verdict presents a problem or indeedthat it results in a greater conviction rate than in other common law jurysystems.1.0.21 The Review noted that some contributors took the view that the issues coveredin this report ought to have been remitted to a Royal Commission toinvestigate. The Review makes no comment on that other than to say that itcarried out the task to which it was entrusted by the Government. It wassatisfied that it had sufficient information, time and resources in which to doso. Where the Review felt that it lacked the expertise or the information uponwhich to make a recommendation, it has said so.The Report and Recommendations1.0.22 The Report that follows: sets out the historical background to the central issueof police questioning in custody; identifies the key issues arising from the20