Every day of the week, juries conclude that people are not telling the truth when they claim not to have foreseen a consequence of their acts; otherwise, there would be no convictions at all. Why should the Government tinker with a definition that was approved by the other place? The House of Lords said that the Government’s definition of recklessness in the provision is unjust and should not continue.
Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c390 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-24 16:01:00 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272610
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272610
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272610