Ben Stokes victim or...

13»

Comments

  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,628
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    joe2008 wrote:
    if that would have been you or I in the same circumstances... :roll:

    Would it have even made it to court?

    The jury found him not guilty, not a member of the legal profession.

    We go to very dangerous places if we convict someone based on the views of the Internet rather than the actual evidence

    Agreed. I think bits of cctv footage being released to the media (who inevitably edit to some degree just to make it fit a 2-minute news item) can give people a false sense of having 'seen it happen'.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    The people claiming that Ben Stokes only got off because he had access to an expensive defence might like to detail exactly why this is? I'm assuming they've followed the case closely and can point to the precise bits of evidence that should have led to his conviction were it not for his defence barrister leading the jury to the opposite verdict after only 3 hours of deliberation.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Have to agree with coopster. I'll take the decision of a jury over the internet, any day of the week. I still wanted him to go down though, cos I hate cricket... ;)
  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,297
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    joe2008 wrote:
    if that would have been you or I in the same circumstances... :roll:
    Would it have even made it to court?
    I would hope so
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    The jury found him not guilty, not a member of the legal profession.
    Unfortunately juries cannot always be relied upon to do the right thing, but it's the best system we have so we must go along with it. People's prejudices do come into play, often subconsciously.
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    We go to very dangerous places if we convict someone based on the views of the Internet rather than the actual evidence.
    Completely agree.
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • tonysj
    tonysj Posts: 391
    I'm guessing here but hows this sound.

    BS to Solicitor, Shit this looks bad for me.
    Depends on what we can offer in your defence.
    BS Well look at the CCTV Im f==ked.
    Solicitor If your were acting in self defence or defending others as you THOUGHT they were in danger then No we have a good case to cloud the jury enough to get a NG verdict.
    BS OK lets do that, what do I have to say under Caution....

    Obviously none of that conversation actually took place know did it....as it client/solicitor confidentiality... ; )

    Its a Funny Old Game...
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,570
    The gay couple who for some reason were not called as witnesses seem to side with Stokes.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/ ... face-trial
  • mrb123
    mrb123 Posts: 4,612
    At least it has given Dan Roan something to whinge about other than cycling.
  • mikeyj28
    mikeyj28 Posts: 754
    Veronese68 wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    joe2008 wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    The jury found him not guilty, not a member of the legal profession.
    Unfortunately juries cannot always be relied upon to do the right thing, but it's the best system we have so we must go along with it. People's prejudices do come into play, often subconsciously.
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    We go to very dangerous places if we convict someone based on the views of the Internet rather than the actual evidence.
    Completely agree.


    I completely agree with the first point. Unfortunately prejudices do come into play.
    Constantly trying to upgrade my parts.It is a long road ahead as things are so expensive for little gain. n+1 is always the principle in my mind.

Categories