Penelope Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 On 23/11/2018 at 20:35, JohnfromUK said: I presume Old Bailey juries are drawn from London? If so ........ ?? Birds of a feather? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 (edited) Case resumed at 10:11 Interestingly it states TRIAL (Part Heard) case resumed not deliberation continued, I wonder if some new evidence has come forward? Edited November 26, 2018 by TIGHTCHOKE Syntax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 I have a nasty feeling that the long time the jury are taking in reaching a verdict will result either in a 'not guilty', or an 'unable to reach a verdict'. In the later case, I believe it is then up to the CPS as to whether to request a retrial? CPS guidance appears to say "The decision to seek a re-trial will depend upon the public interest. Only cases involving significant public interest factors in favour of prosecution warrant a re-trial." On that basis, it seems unlikely that they would request a retrial as it has already cost a great deal for a rather simple charge of no 'danger' to the public (i.e. no violence etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 Yes I quite agree, very disappointing that it ever got to the Central Criminal Court, just goes to show, maintain your silence and it will all just go away! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 Jury have now retired to consider their verdict! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 Hopefully we see some justice, but I won't hold my breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted November 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 18 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: Case resumed at 10:11 Interestingly it states TRIAL (Part Heard) case resumed not deliberation continued, I wonder if some new evidence has come forward? Too late for that, the case has been heard, there needs to be a result, then a possible appeal/retrial if there is compelling new evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted November 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 Retrial . Makes you wonder what the issue with producing a verdict were... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 6 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Retrial . Makes you wonder what the issue with producing a verdict were... I find this extraordinary - for two reasons. Based on the evidence (as much as has been reported in the press anyway), I cannot understand how she could be found 'not guilty'. Were the jury got at/infiltrated by the hard left? (joking (I hope)) Usually retrials (which are very expensive - presumably especially so when held at the Old Bailey) are only ordered by the CPS in fairly serious cases (violence, deaths, serious fraud) - not just for simply failing to declare who was driving a speeding car. The CPS must have something more serious in mind. If she gets off - I can see her with a change of job on Corbyn's team - shadow Minister for Justice! She will have suitable qualifications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 Bloody hell! More expense. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-46316184 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 The judge will probably order the defendant to be discharged, claiming the publicity surrounding the case makes it impossible for her to receive a fair trial? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted November 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 (edited) Perjury IS a serious offence, with a guilty verdict warranting a prison sentence. However, you have to envisage a black female labour MP being sent to jail. I think the judiciary struggled with this, yet couldnt justify NOT jailing her in the event of a guilty verdict. Also , how could a not guilty verdict be returned given the evidence. Also the fact that only one person on the jury needed to believe her innocence, to return a failure to reach a verdict, certainly a flaw in this trial, and any further trial. 3 minutes ago, panoma1 said: The judge will probably order the defendant to be discharged, claiming the publicity surrounding the case makes it impossible for her to receive a fair trial? You just saved me typing that ! This case will disappear, just as it was supposed to. So do MPs and their sons get treated the same as every other member of society when it comes to the law ? I err rest my case .. Edited November 26, 2018 by Rewulf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 24 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Also the fact that only one person on the jury needed to believe her innocence, to return a failure to reach a verdict, certainly a flaw in this trial, and any further trial. Not so - the judge had offered that he would accept a majority verdict. Because one juror had been discharged, that means 10/11 would be needed, so there could have been one dissenter. There must have been at least two. From "The Telegraph" The jury was sent out last week, and having deliberated for more than two days, failed to reach a majority verdict as offered by the judge. A retrial has been ordered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted November 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 55 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: Not so - the judge had offered that he would accept a majority verdict. Because one juror had been discharged, that means 10/11 would be needed, so there could have been one dissenter. There must have been at least two. Thats what I meant , with 11 there need only be one pious christian who could not see a god fearing woman like this to be lying. One person of colour, who doesnt want to see her sent down. One labour party supporter or liberal rights junkie. One dissenter for whatever multitude of reasons. Next trial there needs to be 2, to get the same effect, and then it will be thrown out and forgotten about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 A joke! But I'm not laughing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted November 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 Well I am surprised. Her new trial will start 11 December. So someone is serious about getting a resolution in this case. If she has any brains, she will use this opportunity to plead guilty, and maybe just avoid jail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 5 minutes ago, Rewulf said: If she has any brains, she will use this opportunity to plead guilty, and maybe just avoid jail. I'm not sure she would get much off for that; it is supposed to save court time/costs ....... but having gone through a whole trial already, I suspect the change of plea might reasonably (and indeed ought to) be regarded as too late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted November 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said: I'm not sure she would get much off for that; it is supposed to save court time/costs ....... but having gone through a whole trial already, I suspect the change of plea might reasonably (and indeed ought to) be regarded as too late. If it were you or me Id agree with that. But I believe she would get full credit due to her position. Dont forget ,when she first went not guilty , she had no idea her ex aide would step forward with his damning testimony . Plus her brother bailed on her after her plea too. Any decent council would advise a guilty plea surely ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 50 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Dont forget ,when she first went not guilty , she had no idea her ex aide would step forward with his damning testimony . Plus her brother bailed on her after her plea too. Would I plead guilty if I had managed to get a hung jury 1st time round? Not on your Nelly. She went for 'not guilty' - and despite the extra evidence the Crown managed to obtain, they couldn't get a conviction! No way would I now change to guilty now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 I think she was unbelievably fortunate to get a hung jury. I would be very surprised if she repeated that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted November 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 I suppose we shall never know the hows and whys. You could say she was lucky, she would probably say it was gods will (she does that a lot) What I do is swap her out, and put Mr Joe public in the same trial, same evidence ect And see if he would have got the same result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted November 26, 2018 Report Share Posted November 26, 2018 I suspect not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 27, 2018 Report Share Posted November 27, 2018 Now waiting for the 12th of December! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow Bear Posted November 27, 2018 Report Share Posted November 27, 2018 Let's hope for a press blackout until then - avoids the "unable to get fair trial due to press coverage" get out of jail free card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted November 27, 2018 Report Share Posted November 27, 2018 Good point! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.