:00:08. > :00:11.not be solved even by the best Tonight on Newsnight Scotland:
:00:11. > :00:14.changing the law on corroboration - will it allow more convictions for
:00:14. > :00:21.domestic violence and sexual crimes or will it just lead to more
:00:21. > :00:25.miscarriages of justice? And is the tourist industry ignoring a
:00:25. > :00:27.potentially lucrative market - people with disabilities?
:00:27. > :00:30.Good evening. The Scottish Government looks set to go ahead
:00:30. > :00:34.with far reaching reforms of the legal system, including the end for
:00:34. > :00:37.the need for corroboration. That's where a piece of evidence has to be
:00:37. > :00:39.supported by at least one other before a person can be convicted of
:00:39. > :00:42.a crime. Some believe it's an outdated requirement which stops
:00:42. > :00:52.some crime such as rape and domestic abuse being prosecuted,
:00:52. > :00:57.
:00:57. > :01:00.but others have grave concerns about what the move could mean.
:01:00. > :01:05.Corroboration. One of the most fundamental rules of Scottish
:01:05. > :01:10.criminal law. Each piece of evidence must be backed up by
:01:10. > :01:16.another. It has been an important safeguard against miscarriages of
:01:16. > :01:21.justice. But is it now outdated? It has been with us for centuries
:01:21. > :01:25.in Scotland but it has been watered down. It now appears anachronistic
:01:25. > :01:31.and we are one of the future restrictions in the world but still
:01:31. > :01:35.retains it. -- few jurisdictions. Ending the requirement for
:01:35. > :01:39.corroboration was a key recommendation of a report last
:01:39. > :01:44.year. The judge believed the system should be based on quality of
:01:44. > :01:47.evidence, not quantity. Many prosecutors see the actual
:01:48. > :01:52.need for corroboration as something which prevents cases from coming to
:01:52. > :02:00.court. It was in balanced because it
:02:00. > :02:07.required a numerical exercise, a quantitative test, that before you
:02:07. > :02:15.can he do a prosecution you are required to have a core rated -- a
:02:15. > :02:22.corroborative evidence. It did not matter, the quality of the events.
:02:22. > :02:31.If you did not have corroboration, you could not get past go. That led
:02:31. > :02:36.to injustices and unfairness. The debate is perhaps most intense
:02:36. > :02:40.when it comes to cases of rape and domestic abuse.
:02:40. > :02:47.We have had a number of survivors telling us how devastated they are
:02:47. > :02:52.that their case has not gone to court. In sexual offences, it often
:02:52. > :02:56.happens in private. It is difficult to get corroboration. What that can
:02:57. > :03:00.mean is it can deny justice to survivors of sexual violence.
:03:00. > :03:04.But the removal of corroboration could prove controversial. Some
:03:04. > :03:09.believe it would be the removal of a cornerstone of Scottish law.
:03:09. > :03:13.The first thing is that the government seems to have introduced
:03:13. > :03:15.this consultation process, which on the face of it does not appear to
:03:15. > :03:20.be a consultation process in that they seem to have already indicated
:03:20. > :03:27.they have decided that this is what is going to happen. I consider that
:03:27. > :03:31.the abolition of corroboration on its own, without considering other
:03:31. > :03:37.aspects of changes to the legal system on the say-so of a single
:03:37. > :03:41.judge, any relatively hastily organised review is not the way to
:03:41. > :03:47.proceed. If it is to go, and certainly that
:03:47. > :03:51.is the view, we are sympathetic to that. There have to be safeguards,
:03:51. > :03:55.so the consultation is to make sure we look at what safeguards are
:03:55. > :03:59.necessary if we are going to abolish the law.
:03:59. > :04:05.If corroboration is abolished, we face a situation where you can have
:04:05. > :04:11.a single witness speaking to an end cents, seven people might believe
:04:11. > :04:16.that person and it a person could be imprisoned for murder.
:04:16. > :04:20.Some are able believe the abolition may result in injustices unless
:04:20. > :04:26.safeguards are put in. I'm happy to give an assurance that we will look
:04:26. > :04:29.at putting it in those safeguards. That can weigh up the scales of
:04:29. > :04:33.justice. The major protection, which has all
:04:33. > :04:40.persons accused of crime is the standard of proof, which is beyond
:04:40. > :04:49.reasonable doubt. We are clear that there should be no change in the
:04:49. > :04:54.high standard. Says the government's decision on
:04:54. > :05:00.corroboration a foregone conclusion? And was saved on its --
:05:00. > :05:03.what safeguards could reassure sceptics?
:05:04. > :05:06.I'm joined now by Derek Ogg QC, who is an advocate and the former head
:05:07. > :05:12.of the National Sexual Crimes Unit, and from Aberdeen by Peter Duff,
:05:12. > :05:18.Professor of Criminal Justice at Aberdeen University.
:05:18. > :05:23.Why do you think abolishing is a bad idea?
:05:23. > :05:27.It affects quality. The great thing about corroboration, ask anybody in
:05:27. > :05:31.the street and they can't tell you what it is. But if you ask somebody
:05:31. > :05:36.do think it is right somebody should go to jail for the most
:05:36. > :05:40.serious crimes imaginable, have the reputation last, on the say-so of
:05:40. > :05:48.one person who happens to, on the day they give evidence, perhaps be
:05:48. > :05:56.a good actor? Is that right? Most people would say that is ridiculous.
:05:56. > :06:01.If you said, well, which are like a system that gives a balance or
:06:01. > :06:07.cheque or some other kind of back up, people would say that makes
:06:07. > :06:12.sense. They would say, if my family were in the dog, I would not like
:06:12. > :06:14.their liberty to do spend -- depend on one person.
:06:14. > :06:21.Is there an argument on the other side?
:06:21. > :06:27.Indeed. I listen to what Derek says with interest, but the fact is
:06:27. > :06:37.Scotland's stance low among jurisdictions of its type. --
:06:37. > :06:43.stands low. None of the other states have a requirement for
:06:43. > :06:46.corroboration. In itself, that is evidence that the doctrine is not
:06:46. > :06:52.necessary. Let me quote something from the
:06:52. > :06:58.report. It said, in practice there's no evidence to support the
:06:58. > :07:04.notion that the formal requirement for a correction -- corroboration
:07:04. > :07:08.provides miscarriages of justice. Is there a need for concern?
:07:08. > :07:17.Every single person who is defended in our criminal cases knows the
:07:17. > :07:21.risks of conviction without corroboration. The summit to be
:07:21. > :07:25.arguing -- for somebody to be arguing that other systems don't
:07:25. > :07:29.have corroboration and they get by well, the only reason other systems
:07:29. > :07:33.get by perfectly well is they have substituted for corroboration other
:07:33. > :07:41.safeguards on the quality of evidence.
:07:41. > :07:47.But why not do that here? They are looking at doing just that.
:07:47. > :07:49.The report said there's no need for other safeguards. All you need is a
:07:49. > :07:57.safeguard of prove be a reasonable doubt.
:07:57. > :08:03.I hope I'm not getting is wrong. He said there should be a discretion
:08:04. > :08:10.for the judge to warn of the testimony -- testimony I have --
:08:10. > :08:13.testimony of a particular witness. In England, where they don't have
:08:13. > :08:20.corroboration, they have the same sort of rate of conviction for rape
:08:20. > :08:24.and sexual offences at we have in Scotland. But in England they have
:08:24. > :08:32.safeguards like committal proceedings. They have safeguards
:08:32. > :08:37.like a judge's power to take evidence away from a trial agitate
:08:37. > :08:47.the evidence away from a jury. -- and to take. They don't exist in
:08:47. > :08:49.
:08:49. > :08:55.Scots law because everybody says we The would you agree there needs to
:08:55. > :09:01.be safeguards? There is simple majority verdict, which they have
:09:01. > :09:05.in England, it either needs to be unanimous or 10 to two. Would that
:09:05. > :09:10.need to be changed? I don't think it would necessarily have to be
:09:10. > :09:16.changed, with the greatest respect, it is a bit simplistic to say that
:09:16. > :09:20.the other systems have these safeguards against corroboration.
:09:20. > :09:28.They are not purely because they do not have the option of
:09:28. > :09:32.corroboration. Having said that, I am sympathetic to some of those
:09:32. > :09:38.concerned by the removal of the doctrine, and I certainly don't
:09:38. > :09:42.think it would be a bad thing to give the judge the power to remove
:09:42. > :09:49.the case from the jury when he was convinced that no reasonable jury
:09:49. > :09:58.could convict. Again, I do not see any reason why one could not look
:09:58. > :10:01.at majority verdict in Scotland. Most systems have some kind of
:10:02. > :10:08.majority system. It is structured. It may be that one might want
:10:08. > :10:15.something of that nature. argument against what you're saying
:10:15. > :10:20.is in cases of sexual crimes, which you were heavily involved are that
:10:20. > :10:28.the Crown Office. Rape victims, of rape convicted without any
:10:28. > :10:36.witnesses. The argument is without this, there is a miscarriage of
:10:36. > :10:42.justice. It would be % that -- it would be perfectly plausible to be
:10:42. > :10:46.prosecuted. The rights of a person accused are never in conflict, the
:10:47. > :10:54.only thing that is in conflict is the right of a criminal and a
:10:54. > :11:00.victim. All of the parties have the same interests, that there should
:11:00. > :11:07.be a fair trial and a fair verdict. When I was in charge, Our watchword
:11:07. > :11:12.was quality of evidence. What do you mean by that? Because of lazy
:11:12. > :11:18.police work, you do not get a quality of evidence. People say
:11:18. > :11:23.there were no witnesses, rape is a crime that uniquely takes place at
:11:23. > :11:30.side of the presence of witnesses. That is not true, most criminals
:11:30. > :11:37.try to take their crime I'd side of the presence of witnesses. -- and
:11:37. > :11:42.side. But evidence is about damage to clothing, people screaming, what
:11:42. > :11:47.happens afterwards. Circumstantial evidence can be used to corroborate.
:11:47. > :11:53.The real problem of rape cases is, was their crime at all? That is
:11:53. > :12:02.different from almost every other trial. I just want to bring in
:12:02. > :12:06.Peter Duff. They are seeing the standard of reasonable doubt is all
:12:06. > :12:10.the security you need. Many people would say that is not an argument,
:12:10. > :12:15.but an assertion. I think one contrast juries and judges to take
:12:16. > :12:24.a sensible attitude, very often in a rape case it is essentially the
:12:24. > :12:28.word of the complainer against the word of it accused. The rules on
:12:28. > :12:33.corroboration had been watered down to such an extent that they are
:12:33. > :12:39.extremely complicated now. Sorry to interrupt you, we are out of time.
:12:39. > :12:43.To be continued. The summer weather may be enough to
:12:43. > :12:47.persuade most of us to flee abroad, but in the tourist industry there
:12:47. > :12:50.is a largely untapped market that could improve their profits. People
:12:50. > :13:00.with disabilities want to go on holiday just like everybody else,
:13:00. > :13:08.
:13:08. > :13:13.so who is willing to benefit from Tourism is big business for
:13:14. > :13:18.Scotland. It is estimated it is worth �4.2 billion for the Scottish
:13:18. > :13:23.economy. But tourism experts believe it could be worth so much
:13:23. > :13:26.more or if we targeted one particular niche of the market. The
:13:26. > :13:34.streets of Edinburgh are filling up with tourists from all over the
:13:34. > :13:39.world. I wonder how many of them have disabilities. If we targeted
:13:39. > :13:44.it properly it could be worth millions. According to the last
:13:44. > :13:47.figures available, disabled tourism brought in �325 million to the
:13:47. > :13:52.Scottish economy. That is comparable to things like walking
:13:52. > :13:57.holidays, sailing, golf. Could the tourism industry in Scotland be
:13:57. > :14:01.missing a trick? I don't think people really understood the value
:14:02. > :14:08.of the business case. There are 11 million people in the UK alone.
:14:08. > :14:16.Only two met million of those take holidays. --? Million. The other 9
:14:16. > :14:20.million say it is too difficult. We would like to make Scotland more
:14:20. > :14:25.accessible so we get more of the international market coming over,
:14:25. > :14:29.because they come for the golf, the sailing, the walking, the history.
:14:29. > :14:38.The more accessible we can make Scotland to the American market, we
:14:38. > :14:42.will be winning. When disabled access legislation was introduced
:14:42. > :14:49.in the mid- 1990s, it forced the industry to rethink the disabled
:14:49. > :14:55.customers. The need to see them as an opportunity and not a threat.
:14:55. > :14:59.lot of hotels used to be scared of the Disability discrimination Act.
:14:59. > :15:03.They were scared of being done by a disabled customers, and that is
:15:03. > :15:09.just not the case. Now we realise with huge excitement there is a
:15:09. > :15:14.market out there, a huge market for disabled people. Why didn't you
:15:14. > :15:19.recognise that before? It is realisation. We move on, we have
:15:19. > :15:22.all of our market and what goes on in Scotland. This realisation that
:15:22. > :15:30.there is so many for collide disabled but not in wheelchairs,
:15:30. > :15:36.you cannot see many of them. 96% of disabled people are not in
:15:36. > :15:39.wheelchairs. It is not just the big boys benefiting, the smaller
:15:39. > :15:45.operators have seen the opportunity to exploit this market. In some
:15:45. > :15:48.ways, they might be better placed to provide a more or careful
:15:48. > :15:55.service. It makes complete sense from a business point of view,
:15:55. > :15:59.because you do not have exclusion of any guests who have an interest
:15:59. > :16:03.in staying with you. There is no question of not letting people stay.
:16:03. > :16:07.That doesn't come into your radar. You know that everybody can stay
:16:07. > :16:12.here if it's what they're looking for. Lucy believes it is not just
:16:12. > :16:17.about wraps and specialist showers. It is about having as -- having a
:16:17. > :16:19.good attitude because that is what brings customers back. You might
:16:19. > :16:23.not be able to create something with all the bells and whistles
:16:23. > :16:29.that caters for everyone's needs, but when you make contact with
:16:29. > :16:35.someone and tell them what you have. As long as you are honest, they are
:16:35. > :16:42.very happy. The disabled market is very loyal. Once people find
:16:42. > :16:46.somewhere they are happy with, hotel or bed-and-breakfasts, they
:16:46. > :16:51.feel welcome, everything is done for them, they will go back time
:16:51. > :16:57.and time again. Repeat business is massive. There is a threat to this
:16:57. > :17:01.market, as benefits and pensions are squeezed, could there be less
:17:01. > :17:05.people who can afford to go on holiday? The tourism industry in
:17:05. > :17:10.Scotland will meet to work harder for that disabled Pound. Before we
:17:10. > :17:14.go, an update on the Tornado jets that crashed into the Moray Firth.
:17:14. > :17:18.The search for the missing air crew has been called off due to bad
:17:18. > :17:22.weather, but will start again in the morning. Two crew were picked
:17:22. > :17:26.up by helicopter and remain in hospital in Inverness. Some
:17:26. > :17:31.wreckage has been brought ashore in Buckie, more is being washed up