moochedit
I'm not feeding seagulls
77 and mates on jury. Hopefully no loons on the retrial jury.
Aristocrat's daughter on the run with sex offender and newborn
- Thread starter Part 2
- Start date
andysays
Love and solidarity
Apparently the prosecution now has to decide whether there will actually be a retrial.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Totally speculating here, but she was still receiving funds from a family trust in spite of being estranged, penny to a pinch of shit her old man stumped up for the best briefs money can buy, which often seems to swing things their way.
Combustible
Well-Known Member
As much as that poster was a loon, it's all a bit Daily Maily to be making such pronouncements about a trial you didn't hear all the evidence for.
Silas Loom
Advanced. Forthright. Signifficant.
I wonder if the loons were paid for too. If you suspect the jurors are going to be discharged and googling on the quiet, astroturf nutters flooding content are probably pretty cheap in comparison with the legal bills.
Unlikely. But just a thought. Legal systems are so resistant to change that they must have all sorts of vulnerabilities in an age when content is so easy to spin up and target.
Unlikely. But just a thought. Legal systems are so resistant to change that they must have all sorts of vulnerabilities in an age when content is so easy to spin up and target.
moochedit
I'm not feeding seagulls
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
I'd rather my guilt or innocence was decided by a group of ordinary people, the like if whom you have contempt for than by a judge or a panel of judges. I also assume that having actually attended the trial the jury might have a more nuanced view of the case than you. I assume that you didn't attend the trial in person. The fact that you wanted them to be found guilty doesn't mean that they should have been
Given how long a verdict has been expected, it's not really that much of a surprise that the jury couldn't have come to a verdict they agreed on.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
The pitchfork brigade know what justice means to them.
Silas Loom
Advanced. Forthright. Signifficant.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
You're the one conspiralooning about jurors googling on the quiet and having their decision swayed by the loons posting shit hon Urban75. I find that weird.
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
Don't agree - if the jurers have to be repeatedly warmed about hitting Google during a case, then that suggests that it can be a problem.
Personally I'd imagine that the loons are entirely self-funding - not least because there's no shortage of loons put there, and they latch on to any old rubbish and really put the work in. There's an endless stream of conspiraloon stuff out there about Lucy Letby, Madeline McCann, and a hundred others.
If the old boy is funding the best briefs, they'll have let him know that his money is far better spent on them, and that if he were to be proven to have paid for bot farms in order to nibble the jury, the penalties would be severe - and might well end up in the daughter getting retried.
But we all know how desperate people can convince themselves of pretty much anything, regardless of how foolish it looks from outside...
skyscraper101
0891 50 50 50
5 months of trial and 72 hours deliberating. Looks like someone on the jury was riding this out for as long as they possibly could. There's no way this can't go to a retrial. More public expense wasted over these scumbags. Fuck sake.
Combustible
Well-Known Member
Seems like that googling is more likely to lead to the suggestion that they must be guilty, who needs a full trial, lock them up and stop wasting taxpayers money. Not to mention that it's not just about being swayed by opinions on the trial, but also coming across any information related to the case that was not presented to the jury in court.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
Looks like you are jumping to the conclusion the conclusion that you want to jump to. As to a retrial, regardless of your frothing about the expense to the public purse, I don't suppose that it is either impossible or unlikely.
skyscraper101
0891 50 50 50
andysays
Love and solidarity
Looby
Well-Known Member
That other thread was nutty as hell. Let’s not merge them!
Plumdaff
joy in people
The defence pathologist gave evidence that if everything the defendants said was correct then their poor baby might have not have got very cold, and claiming a pop up festival tent from Argos might operate like a Mongolian yurt. That struck me as remarkably credulous and dubious but I wonder if his evidence convinced some of the jury.
Silas Loom
Advanced. Forthright. Signifficant.
This one is going in the same direction tbf. Apparently we want to abolish juries and hold secret trials now, because Corbyn.
Looby
Well-Known Member
I’m not surprised at all. It seemed all the way through that the prosecution case was shaky according to the commentary.
The longer it went on the more it felt like there’d either be no verdict or not guilty.
Yossarian
⏭️
Guilty on two charges
Constance Marten and Mark Gordon guilty of two charges
The couple will face a retrial - possibly in March 2025.
www.bbc.com
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
