| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Missed a great opportunity there to putOriginally Posted by Richyrich
WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Another trial would be costly for both sides and I'm not sure what it would achieve. If he is found guilty, he can't be punished again.
I don't think you can really argue another trial would be fair now given the amount of publicity about this either.
I suspect both sides might want to drop this. Or perhaps Mr Evans might want to pursue various parties for damages if they can show malice.
Have you ever been on a jury? Just curious. I have twice and on both occasions the amount of bigotry and ignorance displayed in the jury room absolutely staggered me.
Not sure if you are on the wind up here and just playing stupid
you do not need to be found innocent
His conviction was quashed, so it was 100% wrong and in the eyes of the law it did not happen
So he doesnt need to be found Innocent now, he is Innocent
He may face another trial, but with the new evidence the CPS will have to look at it all again and decide to proceed or not
I think first and foremost Ched Evans wants to clear his name
I reckon that's it and the appellant judges know it. with the evidence as it is the cps are most likely going to have to have to stand in front of the trial judge and jury and say the crown has no case to present. "Case dismissed Mr Evans you're a free man who was wrongly convicted"
It doesn't mean acquitted though does it?
I have, it was an eye opener. On the one case I was juror, it was plain as day that the fella was innocent, but one juror wouldn't have it and some of the other jurors were just clueless and went with the flow. Luckily the juror who was sure he was guilty, eventually changed his mind and justice was done. I think the jury system in theory is a good one, but in practice has it's faults.
Great news for the lad and he deserves to get his life back on track and put this behind him. With new evidence I can't see this getting passed the evidential stage and the CPS will throw it out.
WRONG
Ched is simply a man who has been accused of rape at the moment.
Unles/Until found guilty, he is innocent, and NOT a rapist.
There is a difference.
Cop-out. He does not have to be found innocent. He IS innocent. That is a simple premise on which our society is based. He does not have to prove innocence. The CPS have to prove guilt.
I see the message board police do not accept this, he is guilty period so they say.
The court gave the CPS two months in which to indict Evans. Essentially he is a free innocent man, as if from scratch.
Now the CPS have a timeframe they have to stick to. They have to make a decision based on the best interests of the public in terms of safety and public purse.
A guilty decision seems highly highly unlikely if new evidence convinced the Supreme Court that the original trial verdict was to be quashed. It also suggests that this evidence was possibly 'around' at the time of the case. Something they have in there possession today relates to the verdict reached in good faith and that seems to me to be a bit fishy
Really not surprised by this and happy that justice looks now about to be done. As I said in the other thread, the prosecution case was leaker than Deportivo's defence last night.
The case does have wider repercussions however, and as a father to young lad and a young girl, I'll be using it to explain what can go wrong on a night out.
Are you actually in New York? Is that it? Has the 'in God we trust' religious moral ball bag American rubbish fried your brains?
Evans is a man, we are all men regardless of nationality when it comes to miscarriages of justice. We are more interested in this case because the lad represented his country at football but had this been anyone else anywhere, based on what we have learned the conclusions are the same as that reached by the Supreme Court. Innocent.
Innocent as in 'he didn't do it'.
CPS now have to prove guilt and that seems very implausible.
You're either a very nasty minded bloke or just stupid. Or both.
Well said.Both.
I've never been part of a jury myself but I've known quite a few people who have and each one has said exactly the same thing. It's quite a scary observation unfortunately.
They will be voting next.
I'm not sure if you're making a point about democracy here or just being sarcastic. Either way it's often evident that human psychological bias and heuristics are used rather than logical, rational thought.
Anyone called up for jury service should be made to watch 12 angry Men before they sit.
Great film.
Kahneman - smart guy.
It's 10 years ago now so the horror has diminished somewhat but in one of my cases a police woman gave evidence she had crept into the male toilets in a park in Derby and seen one man orally pleasuring another man's manhood (through a hole) over the top of a 7ft cubicle door. Guilty. The police woman was 5ft 2in. Mostly my fellow jurors were concerned he was a gay and therefore must have been "kiddy fiddler" and so my "constantly going on about minor inconsistencies" was "stupid".
Ever since I take anything I hear emanating from the legal system with a huge dose of skepticism.
indeed, not forgetting tversky
Ahhhhhh shadup, the lot of yer.
Knew there'd be a long thread with knobbers pretending to be legal experts, knobbers moralising, knobbers stating your innocent until proven guilty at any given opportunity, knobbers saying i told yer so.
Too many knobbers......feck off.
Wow, you've got hang ups, seedless?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote