Propose a change

Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995

Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.

Change 1

What to do with it
As published

281 Routine evidence: autopsy and forensic science reports.

(1) Where in a trial an autopsy report is lodged as a production by the prosecutor it shall be presumed that the body of the person identified in that report is the body of the deceased identified in the indictment or complaint, unless the accused not less than (i) in the case of proceedings in the High Court, seven days before the preliminary hearing; (ii) in any other case, six days before the trial; or (in either case) by such later time before the trial as the court may in special circumstances allow, gives notice that the contrary is alleged. (2) At the time of lodging an autopsy or forensic science report as a production the prosecutor may intimate to the accused that it is intended that only one of the pathologists or forensic scientists . . . purporting to have signed the report shall be called to give evidence in respect thereof; and , where such intimation is given, the evidence of one of those pathologists or forensic scientists shall be sufficient evidence of any fact or conclusion as to fact contained in the report and of the qualifications of the signatories, unless the accused, not less than (i) in the case of proceedings in the High Court, seven days before the preliminary hearing; (ii) in any other case, six days before the trial; or (in either case) by such later time before the trial as the court may in special circumstances allow, serves notice on the prosecutor that he requires the attendance at the trial of the other pathologist or forensic scientist also. (3) Where, following service of a notice by the accused under subsection (2) above, evidence is given in relation to an autopsy or forensic science report by both of the pathologists or forensic scientists purporting to have signed the report, the evidence of those pathologists or forensic scientists shall be sufficient evidence of any fact (or conclusion as to fact) contained in the report.

Your change, as a redline

281 Routine evidence: autopsy and forensic science reports.

(1) Where in a trial an autopsy report is lodged as a production by the prosecutor it shall be presumed that the body of the person identified in that report is the body of the deceased identified in the indictment or complaint, unless the accused not less than (i) in the case of proceedings in the High Court, seven days before the preliminary hearing; (ii) in any other case, six days before the trial; or (in either case) by such later time before the trial as the court may in special circumstances allow, gives notice that the contrary is alleged. (2) At the time of lodging an autopsy or forensic science report as a production the prosecutor may intimate to the accused that it is intended that only one of the pathologists or forensic scientists . . . purporting to have signed the report shall be called to give evidence in respect thereof; and , where such intimation is given, the evidence of one of those pathologists or forensic scientists shall be sufficient evidence of any fact or conclusion as to fact contained in the report and of the qualifications of the signatories, unless the accused, not less than (i) in the case of proceedings in the High Court, seven days before the preliminary hearing; (ii) in any other case, six days before the trial; or (in either case) by such later time before the trial as the court may in special circumstances allow, serves notice on the prosecutor that he requires the attendance at the trial of the other pathologist or forensic scientist also. (3) Where, following service of a notice by the accused under subsection (2) above, evidence is given in relation to an autopsy or forensic science report by both of the pathologists or forensic scientists purporting to have signed the report, the evidence of those pathologists or forensic scientists shall be sufficient evidence of any fact (or conclusion as to fact) contained in the report.

One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".

Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.

A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.

Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.

Sign in to file it

Think it through

Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.

Questions to start with
Think it through
Legal information from the published text, not advice for your case. Check the sources. Find a law · What the register holds