From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

This may be way beyond what you actually care about but this video,
featuring a discussion between Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Starkey,
eventually gets to the point where Rees-Mogg explains how the two
different jury types - grand jury and petty jury (which we just call
"jury" now) - came about. You might find that interesting. It starts not
too long past the 20 minute mark of this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqpoXszp2dM [25 minutes]

Mind you, I'm not sure if it will make sense without some of the
preceding discussion, which is pretty interesting itself - I'd never
heard of a "humble address" before - but not terribly relevant to the
history of juries. But if you're following the whole Mandelson/(former)
Prince Andrew scandal, this will give you a sense of the major
Constitutional crisis this may well be.
--
Rhino

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

On Feb 26, 2026 at 3:14:36 PM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

This may be way beyond what you actually care about but this video, featuring a discussion between Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Starkey,
eventually gets to the point where Rees-Mogg explains how the two
different jury types - grand jury and petty jury (which we just call
"jury" now) - came about.

Not to be overly pedantic, but it's spelled 'petit jury'.


--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Feb 26, 2026 at 3:14:36 PM PST, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:

This may be way beyond what you actually care about but this video, >>featuring a discussion between Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Starkey, >>eventually gets to the point where Rees-Mogg explains how the two >>different jury types - grand jury and petty jury (which we just call >>"jury" now) - came about.

Not to be overly pedantic, but it's spelled 'petit jury'.

On Usenet? That's unhoid of.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

This may be way beyond what you actually care about but this video,

I shall get to it. Thank you.

. . .

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

On 2026-02-26 6:39 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

On Feb 26, 2026 at 3:14:36 PM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

This may be way beyond what you actually care about but this video,
featuring a discussion between Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Starkey,
eventually gets to the point where Rees-Mogg explains how the two
different jury types - grand jury and petty jury (which we just call
"jury" now) - came about.

Not to be overly pedantic, but it's spelled 'petit jury'.

Thanks, I'd never seen it written. It makes sense too. After all,
"grand" is surely a borrowing of the French word for "big" so it makes
sense that it's counterpart jury would come from the French word for
"small".
--
Rhino
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

On 2026-02-26 7:09 p.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

This may be way beyond what you actually care about but this video,

I shall get to it. Thank you.

. . .

You're welcome!
--
Rhino
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

Knowing your interest in all things legal, I think you might be
interested in this discussion about the role of international law in the forming of national policies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qozUZc_fEN4 [10 minutes; the first
couple of minutes is breaking news but then the relevant part begins]

The context is the Keir Starmer originally refused to let their closest
ally, America, use their bases in either the UK or Diego Garcia (in the
Indian Ocean) to launch aircraft against Iran for any reason. After 2
days of pressure from both the US and domestic elements, he reversed
himself and allowed those bases to be used "provided they were used
strictly for defensive purposes".

Starmer apparently has strong beliefs about international law trumping domestic law and his Attorney-General (and close friend) Lord Hermer
feels the same so the two fought the idea of the US using the bases
tooth and claw.

Jacob Rees-Mogg (who is NOT a lawyer) and his guest (who IS a top
lawyer) discuss the matter. Rees-Mogg restates these points and expands
on some of them in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOvOiy0_voA [9 minutes]

In a nutshell, international law is extremely problematic as a basis for national policy.
--
Rhino

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

On Mar 2, 2026 at 3:37:36 PM PST, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

Knowing your interest in all things legal, I think you might be
interested in this discussion about the role of international law in the forming of national policies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qozUZc_fEN4 [10 minutes; the first
couple of minutes is breaking news but then the relevant part begins]

The context is the Keir Starmer originally refused to let their closest ally, America, use their bases in either the UK or Diego Garcia (in the Indian Ocean) to launch aircraft against Iran for any reason. After 2
days of pressure from both the US and domestic elements, he reversed
himself and allowed those bases to be used "provided they were used
strictly for defensive purposes".

Starmer apparently has strong beliefs about international law trumping domestic law and his Attorney-General (and close friend) Lord Hermer
feels the same so the two fought the idea of the US using the bases
tooth and claw.

Jacob Rees-Mogg (who is NOT a lawyer) and his guest (who IS a top
lawyer) discuss the matter. Rees-Mogg restates these points and expands
on some of them in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOvOiy0_voA [9 minutes]

In a nutshell, international law is extremely problematic as a basis for national policy.

Starmer's press release in response to Trump's attack on Iran:


https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/2028534673002070016/vid/avc1/1280x720/Bv5ndF2YUSY2KOS2.mp4?tag=21

;-)


--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

Knowing your interest in all things legal, I think you might be
interested in this discussion about the role of international law in the >forming of national policies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qozUZc_fEN4 [10 minutes; the first
couple of minutes is breaking news but then the relevant part begins]

The context is the Keir Starmer originally refused to let their closest >ally, America, use their bases in either the UK or Diego Garcia (in the >Indian Ocean) to launch aircraft against Iran for any reason. After 2
days of pressure from both the US and domestic elements, he reversed
himself and allowed those bases to be used "provided they were used
strictly for defensive purposes".

Starmer apparently has strong beliefs about international law trumping >domestic law and his Attorney-General (and close friend) Lord Hermer
feels the same so the two fought the idea of the US using the bases
tooth and claw.

Jacob Rees-Mogg (who is NOT a lawyer) and his guest (who IS a top
lawyer) discuss the matter. Rees-Mogg restates these points and expands
on some of them in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOvOiy0_voA [9 minutes]

In a nutshell, international law is extremely problematic as a basis for >national policy.

I'll get to this when I have a moment.

I guess I cannot blame Starmer. If he wants no involvement with war in
Iran, then yes, he won't allow an ally to drag them into war.

However, Diego Garcia is different as it's been a joint US base since
the Viet Nam War era.

I keep having to remind myself that this is a large island in the Chagos Archipelago, named for a Portuguese nobleman, then held by France till
one of the Napoleonic wars after which the British got it. There was a
tiny "native" population, although in human terms, these islands only
recently became inhabited a few centuries back. They forced out the
natives to build the base.

To this day, the French still have Reunion.

Looking it up, Starmer signed a treaty with Nauritius, yet to be ratified,
to transfer sovereignity but keep the base. The archipelago had been
split off from Mauritius before sovereignity. I'm not sure they had been ethnically similar historically but in colonial days, peoples came from
all over the place.

The treaty came after the British lost international arbitration.

It's east of Africa, no where near Iran. Short of building an artificial island, I don't know where else the US could dock an aircraft carrier.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2