On the record
Experience suggests that a random sample of popular opinion is more likely to do justice in this type of case than is a judge.
Said by
Harold J. Laski
Source
gutenberg.orgHarold J. Laski: “Experience suggests that a random sample of popular opinion is more likely to do justice in this type of case than is a…”
Editor's note · Context
Laski argues that a jury is more likely to deliver justice in cases of speech than a judge.
Share
More from Harold J. Laski
There are realms of conduct within which, to be free, I must be permitted to act as I please; to be denied self-expression there, is to be denied freedom.
Nor do I see why it is unconstitutional for Labour, as in 1926, to withdraw from work in an orderly and coherent way.
The case for the view that freedom of thought and speech is a good in itself is fairly easy to make.
Where mistakes are made, where there is corruption, or dishonesty, or abuse, it can be brought home forthwith to its authors.
Other voices in this conversation
