Ewen Macdonald found not guilty

**Deano** · 10th July 2012, 12:49

Originally Posted by Tigadee

Have you read a good book lately?

i'm intrigued as to what the dude has gotten away over his lifetime if these are just examples of recent events

**Deano** · 10th July 2012, 12:52

Originally Posted by rustic101

Never to let facts get in the way, but, did any of the experts on here watch Sunday last night when they interviewed his lawyer?

Just saying.....

king didn't endear himself to me at all, but not many defense lawyers have.

"he (mcdonald) is just a typical kiwi bloke"

that'd make a great tui ad

**SimJen** · 10th July 2012, 13:00

Originally Posted by Deano

king didn't endear himself to me at all, but not many defense lawyers have.

"he (mcdonald) is just a typical kiwi bloke"

that'd make a great tui ad

A typical kiwi bloke that maliciously uses an axe to vandalize houses before setting fire to them!

**HenryDorsetCase** · 10th July 2012, 13:03

Originally Posted by SimJen

A typical kiwi bloke that maliciously uses an axe to vandalize houses before setting fire to them!

Well, to be fair it was just the one house. Well, two: (the old one burned, the new one vandalised). But only one property. Statistically as long as you arent married to his sister, you'll be fine.

fuknK1W1 · 10th July 2012, 13:55

Originally Posted by Tigadee

Have you read a good book lately?

That would be funny if...

**Coldrider** · 10th July 2012, 22:33

Originally Posted by Deano

i'm intrigued as to what the dude has gotten away over his lifetime

homework, after all who can't spell 'fuken bitch slappr' correctly.

**PrincessBandit** · 12th July 2012, 07:14

And according to the latest "poll" commented on in stuff's homepage, only 1 in 5 NZ'ers think he didn't murder his bro in law.

**Berries** · 12th July 2012, 07:22

All polls are rubbish though, I have never told the truth in one. And to be fair, 'only' 48% thought he did kill him.

**scott411** · 12th July 2012, 07:35

Originally Posted by PrincessBandit

And according to the latest "poll" commented on in stuff's homepage, only 1 in 5 NZ'ers think he didn't murder his bro in law.

thank fuck they do not convict people on telephone polls,

do not even see the public interest in having a poll like this, really the only poeple that mattered were the Jury that sat though a month of tetomony, and came back not guilty, the trail by media even after the real trail is finished is over the top,

**oneofsix** · 12th July 2012, 07:47

Originally Posted by scott411

thank fuck they do not convict people on telephone polls,

do not even see the public interest in having a poll like this, really the only poeple that mattered were the Jury that sat though a month of tetomony, and came back not guilty, the trail by media even after the real trail is finished is over the top,

+1 proves nothing. I think he probably did it but I also think it wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt and therefore realise I could be wrong. In that poll I would have been one of the ones saying he did it but if I had to have been the 12th person on the jury I would have had to agree with the other 11 and that is based on the 1% of the evidence the public got to see.

Not proven where they can be re-charged could be an option but would have to be considered without the emotion of a recent case. Could "not proven" also mean that innocent people have to live under the stress of being retried on bullshit charges after having already gone through it?

As to being forced to give evidence that is just lynch mob bullshit. The case should be able to be proven without the defendant getting on the stand. It allows mis-carriages such as a foul mouth biker being more likely to be found guilty just because he swore and didn't present well on the stand and upset our "moral standards".

**scott411** · 12th July 2012, 08:12

Originally Posted by oneofsix

As to being forced to give evidence that is just lynch mob bullshit. The case should be able to be proven without the defendant getting on the stand. It allows mis-carriages such as a foul mouth biker being more likely to be found guilty just because he swore and didn't present well on the stand and upset our "moral standards".

i agree with not having to go on the stand in your own defence, if this was to happen it would be open season with well educated lawyers taking on laymen and confusing them,

the not proven verdict could draw out already long running cases, with the prosecuter having unlimited access to funds to keep cases going,

I think a 11-1 verdict is a good comprimise when it seems clear all but one jury member agrees

**oneofsix** · 12th July 2012, 08:16

Originally Posted by scott411

i agree with not having to go on the stand in your own defence, if this was to happen it would be open season with well educated lawyers taking on laymen and confusing them,

the not proven verdict could draw out already long running cases, with the prosecuter having unlimited access to funds to keep cases going,

I think a 11-1 verdict is a good comprimise when it seems clear all but one jury member agrees

This wasn't an 11-1, they only had 11 so it was unanimous.

**HenryDorsetCase** · 12th July 2012, 08:19

Originally Posted by scott411

i agree with not having to go on the stand in your own defence, if this was to happen it would be open season with well educated lawyers taking on laymen and confusing them,

You say that like its a bad thing...