Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
EUROZONE UNEMPLOYMENT HAS broken another record today with figures for March showing that the rate is now 12.1 per cent, up 0.1 percentage point from February.
Figures from the EU’s statistics agency, Eurostat, show that the unemployment rate for the 27-member European Union was 10.9 per cent in March, stable compared to February.
This means that 26.5 million are unemployed in the EU including 19.2 million within the eurozone.
But both the eurozone – which accounts for the 17 members whose currency is the euro, including Ireland – and the EU show unemployment rates which have risen markedly since March 2012 when they were 11 per cent and 10.3 per cent respectively.
One of the highest unemployment rates is in Spain where over a quarter of the workforce are unemployed – 26.7 per cent – while the lowest is in Austria where just 4.7 per cent are unemployed.
Compared to 12 months ago the unemployment rate increased in 19 EU member states and fell in eight.
The highest increase was recorded in Greece – 21.5 per cent to 27.2 per cent – while Ireland is among the nations to show the largest decrease from 15 per cent to 14.1 per cent.
Eurostat figures put Ireland’s unemployment rate at 14.1 per cent. Live Register numbers published earlier this month showed that Ireland’s unemployment rate was 14 per cent with 2,200 fewer people signing on in March.
The Central Statistics Office is due to publish Live Register figures for April tomorrow morning.
This Eurostat graph maps out the rates of unemployment in all 27 countries (Click here if you are having trouble seeing this image):
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
This case showed exactly what is right with due process.. Mr dwyer got his chance to tell his story, was assumed innocent and the prosecution then proved his guilt. Now he’ll rot in jail and everyone knows he did it
Reality is more gruesome than a movie could ever be.
The jury system relies heavily on the assumed ability of the jurors to be able to comprehend complex legal matters that are sometimes crucial to a case.A juror is not obliged to offer any proof of his or hers understanding of such a matter.That could lead and has done in many cases to an ‘incorrect’ verdict.While the appeal system cleans up most of these errors, I wonder if it is time to test jurors for simple comprehension skills rather than let them lose on long costly trials that lead to long costly appeals….etc.It is the best system to have… A jury system ,But it needs to be reviewed.
Claiming to understand reasonable doubt and actually understanding it are two different things.
What parameters would you use to decide that Alan? Sounds to me like the process of jury selection would be so complex as to be unworkable and appeals more likely to succeed due to technicalities concerning juror selection.
Agree completely with you. The selection should at the very least be based on educational standards.I know that sounds elitist and even snobbish. It is not intended to be so.A very good friend of mine took literacy classes about 8/9 years ago.He had served on a jury and there were requirements to ‘read’ some of the evidence in the jury room afterwards.He admitted that he struggled to do so and could not understand half of what he read.Even the ensuing debate among the jurors was double dutch to him in parts.He said he was to embarrassed to admit this. I do not believe his experience to be unique.
I cannot offer a solution,Though I still believe there to be a problem.
This IS a difficult question. However, having an education is not the same as having intelligence or even comprehension. I know several people with degrees, but little real understanding of their subject. A degree gan be obtained with a good memory, or even using memory tricks. In the Elaine O’Hara case, I do think there IS reasonable doubt. The Master/slave relationship is not nearly as uncommon as many people believe. Dolcett or killing, can easilly be a fantasy, but there is a huge difference between having a fantasy as extreme as that, and actually doing it. I think it is a definite possibility that Elaine took her own life, telling Dwyer where, and that he burried her. That doesn’t absolve him from responsibility though, as I do believe it likely that he pushed her in that direction, and failed to report her death.
It doesn’t sound like the concept of reasonable doubt is very complicated at all to be honest.
On the face of it, no. But in practice it becomes exponentially more complex as more and more issues come into play.
I disagree Alan. Reasonable doubt is exactly that, reasonable. It is a subjective concept that a jury of one’s peers is assumed to understand. That is the whole basis of a jury trial. It only becomes complex when one attempts to explain a meaning or definition around it.
Hope he rots in hell
There is no hell. I hope he rots in his head!
It is not the same as a philosophical doubt…but it is often compared to a doubt about making a major decision e.g. marriage..buying a house…..at the very least you must be pretty sure or happy to go ahead.
He looks strange and was into weird sex = guilty
He doesn’t look strange at all to be honest and plenty of people are into weird sex but aren’t murderers.
In cases like these, most people would prefer to wrongfully convict a weirdo than to have weirdo murderer running free. Smoke and fire. Lots of smoke with this weirdo, hence he is almost certainly guilty!
Wish the media didn’t focus on this case as much as it did.
If you understand what a Theory is in the scientific sense, then there should be no problem understanding the premises of reasonable doubt.
It really is actually simple.
That was a good and helpful explanation. Thanks.
have your say