View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
The little I've read suggests that the defense strategy has been to attack her credibility and recollection. Things like telling Wilkinson that he had removed her underwear then later admitting she wasn't wearing any and signing a $300k+ book deal with the bandana'd boofhead, Wilkinsons husband.
He declined to testify which means the prosecution couldn't cross examine him, so the whole thing comes down to does the jury believe her.
Risky, but they only need 1 person out of 12 (i think) to not be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Wouldn’t that mean a hung jury and retrial? (That is, if 11-1 isn’t enough for a conviction, which I think it may be.)
You need all or most to be unsure to get a not guilty verdict, don’t you? _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
You need all to get a unanimous decision, 1 dissenting can still get a majority verdict apparently, any more than 1 juror disagreeing, game over it seems.
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ja200097/s46.html _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ Isn't this trial being conducted under ACT law? I haven't been following it and don't much care but unless they've changed their law, I think they only have unanimous verdicts in criminal trials, there. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Not going to argue, from what I read it seemed to need a unanimous decision, I didn't specifically check ACT law so i'll take your word for it. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
Jesus.
You could grate his knob and get enough cheese to cover a family sized pizza. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Jesus, anti vaxxers go to extraordinary lengths. _________________ “I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
I believe they start brand new, have yo see the person answering for a start to gauge true meaning.
Well on SVU they always do! Often the Vic says no
Absolutely shit for her, just wrong poor woman.
-or for him if he’s innocent
Haven’t been following really _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
What'sinaname
Joined: 29 May 2010 Location: Living rent free
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ yep, horrible ordeal for all parties really. If he's guilty, it sucks putting her through all of this again, and it he's innocent, then it's shit for him having to go through it again. _________________ Fighting against the objectification of woman. |
|
|
|
|
eddiesmith
Lets get ready to Rumble
Joined: 23 Nov 2004 Location: Lexus Centre
|
Post subject: | |
|
I remember one famous trial recently where the victim testified first time and the jury was hung, but second time they convicted after they didn’t actually see the victim testify as it was either read out or just a video from first trial. Given it was later overturned may have meant in person makes it easier to read their reactions.
Not casting any opinions on this case, but it can obviously be an option to just reuse the previous testimony. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
I seem to recall the same thing Ed, for some reason George Pell comes to mind.
And yeah, same as others, I'm not casting judgment. I believe that she believes what she's saying, but considering she was poleaxed drunk, how much is real vs imagined, no clues. Either way , having to go through the ordeal once would have been horrible for her, having to do it a second time is wrong. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yeah, can't help but think there has to be a better way than this laborious, emotionally exhausting, hideously expensive process that takes literally years out of people's lives. Easy to see why so many rapes are never reported – plenty of reason for someone who believes themselves to have been victimised to not want to put themselves through this. And of course I feel for those wrongfully accused, too. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Dark Beanie
Joined: 06 Feb 2004 Location: A galaxy far, far away.
|
|
|
|
|
|