The Nigel Evans case proves that juries are smarter than our liberal elite

You may remember this little gem of a story from a month or so back. Justifiably worried at the ramping up of rhetoric by western politicians over the crisis in Ukraine, Blackpool ‘beauty technician’ Gemma Worrall took to a social media site to ask the — presumably rhetorical — question: ‘Why is our President Barraco Barner getting involved with Russia, scary.’ Why indeed, Gemma? The scorn and hilarity was of course immediately forthcoming at this fantastic level of pig ignorance, and lots of people, including me, wrote spiteful things about Gemma’s IQ level.

Gemma was indignant at being publicly reviled as the most stupid woman who has ever walked the earth and revealed to sniggering reporters that, in fact, she possessed 17 GCSEs. This should tell you more about the intellectual rigour required these days to acquire a GCSE than it tells you about Gemma, I think. Having seen some of the stuff my oldest son has had to revise for his GCSEs, I suspect that a block of Cathedral City cheddar cheese could manage at least a C grade in one of the sciences. These are not overly taxing exams — but I digress. Some people wondered, in mock astonishment, that human beings as thick and as badly informed as Gemma were allowed to vote and — worse, still worse — serve on juries. Grotesque levels of public stupidity, such as Gemma’s, are frequently cited as reasons for abandoning the jury system altogether, because the matters are far too complex for crassly ignorant northern halfwits to comprehend, still less adjudicate upon.

Most popular

Julie Burchill

Will I ever pee again?

Sometimes I’m tempted to agree, such as when I’m stuck for half an hour behind some lard mountain who is unable to understand the simple instructions on a self-service ticket machine, and keeps jabbing away with a fat sausage finger at the wrong bloody button, a look of bemused incredulity on his dumb porky face.