Trial. Bail. Liberation.
The right to prosecute for a crime is vested, by the law of Scotland, either in the party injured, or in the Lord Advocate, who is the only prosecutor for the public interest; the popular actions of the Roman law being unknown in our practice. A criminal prosecution by the private party embraces not only the private interest and damages, but the full pains of law. But, in order to support the private instance, the party must be able to show some substantial and peculiar interest in the issue of the trial, not a mere remote interest as a member of the community, or even as the member of a portion or class of it, which has been particularly injured.
Definition source
Bell, William, A Dictionary and Digest of the Law of Scotland, 7th ed. rev. George Ross (Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, 1861), s.v. “Trial.” Public domain.
Legal Subject: Trial |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appendix for Durham | 1791 | Perjury, Witness, Trial, Oath | The pursuers alleged that Alexander Durham perjured himself in a trial before the Circuit Court of Justiciary at Perth by falsely swearing that James Brown was present during Durham's examination. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| His Majesty's Advocate v. Lilburn and Buchanan | 1771 | Trial, homicide, pannels | On September 29, 1770, Lilburn and Buchanan passed by the bridge of Boquhan when a mastiff or bull dog attacked them. They threw rocks at the dog. Sejeant Robertson came to the bridge to get the dog and Joseph Martine came to assist him. Lilburn and Buchanan struck Joseph Martine, who died the next day. They were arraigned for trial, and admitted attacking Martine, but the Court ruled that the two men could not be guilty of homicide because twelve hours passed between the attack and Martine's death. Had help been gotten, Martine might have lived. |
| His Majesty's Advocate v. Muir | 1797 | Libel, Verdict, homicide, Arrestment, Aliment, Trial | Thomas Muir, soldier in the 65th Regiment of Foot and defender, argued that he could not be convicted of culpable homicide if indicted only for murder. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
| His Majesty's Advocate v. Murdison | 1773 | Theft, Trial, Verdict | Alexander Murdison was subject to a criminal indictment alleging that he and his herder, John Miller, stole certain sheep “or [were guilty] of receiving and having in their custody the aforesaid parcels of sheep.” Murdison was convicted, and subsequently challenged the verdict on three grounds. First, according to Murdison, the verdict did not specify whether the defendants were guilty of theft or of receiving stolen property. Second, no verdict was given on several of the specific charges in the indictment. Finally, the verdict was signed on a Sunday. |
| Robert Forsyth v. Hon. Henry Erskine and the Members of the Faculty of Advocates | 1790 | Faculty, Jurisdiction, Presbytery, Trial | Robert Forsyth petitioned for admission to trial, and Henry Erskine and the Members of the Faculty of Advocates responded that his ecclesiastical status disqualified him. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
