Ewen Macdonald found not guilty

**Str8 Jacket** · 3rd July 2012, 16:39

In my opinion this case should never have gone to court without some SOLID evidence. The case was too flimsy, they just could not have found him guilty, not without a shadow of doubt. Not that I don't think that he didn't do it.....

**merv** · 3rd July 2012, 16:39

"Not Guilty" means he can't be tried again doesn't it even if new evidence comes to light?

**Murray** · 3rd July 2012, 16:44

Bloody Farma's - six mumpths ago I couldnt evn spel it now I is one

**skippa1** · 3rd July 2012, 16:52

Originally Posted by Madness

Kylie Guy is guilty of being smoking pot

hope shes not on a benefit

**Maki** · 3rd July 2012, 16:53

Another stupid foul up and waste of time. If they had no evidence, why take him to court and waste my tax $ trying to pin a crime on him that there was zero proof that he committed. I can't understand what took the jury so long...

**Winston001** · 3rd July 2012, 17:13

There is no reason to say the Crown or the police made any mistakes. They were faced with a deliberate murder and did their best to identify the offender. The trial relied upon circumstantial evidence but that isn't unusual or surprising. Many crimes are not witnessed.

Once MacDonald was caught lying and then confessed to the arson etc, he looked good for this crime. Means motive and opportunity.

Not Guilty means not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't mean "he didn't do it".

To be accurate, he is presumed innocent now but he still faces prison and his life will be a mess for a long time.

**SMOKEU** · 3rd July 2012, 17:27

Originally Posted by merv

"Not Guilty" means he can't be tried again doesn't it even if new evidence comes to light?

I'm pretty sure he can be retried at a later date.

**merv** · 3rd July 2012, 17:34

Originally Posted by SMOKEU

I'm pretty sure he can be retried at a later date.

OK Mrs was just saying to me too she thought that law had changed as you say and they can be tried again. My memory was just a bit out of date.

**Str8 Jacket** · 3rd July 2012, 17:36

Originally Posted by merv

My memory was just a bit out of date.

Is that a flash way of saying that you're old?!

**tigertim20** · 3rd July 2012, 17:36

Ive been following this for a while, and its no surprise to me at all that he was found not guilty.
dunno if I think he did it or not, but the crown case never looked anything more than feeble.

**scumdog** · 3rd July 2012, 17:37

Originally Posted by sil3nt

Crown fucked this one up big time!

How?

**Quasievil** · 3rd July 2012, 17:47

Who gives a fuck

**Paul in NZ** · 3rd July 2012, 17:48

So he didn't quite get off Scott free then?

Ah hem...

I think the Police got it right but if half the shit I've heard is true they were tripped up at the last minute by a bombshell witness who decided not to testify. That would have provided plenty of motive.