Nicholas rape trial outcome discussion

[The Stranger:Me]

I do not say that ranks were closed, only that the perception in the public eye is that it could be so. The investigation/trial could also just be so much window dressing to give the impression of absolute impartiality. The spending of a few million dollars in this fashion to raise public opinion of the police would be well spent were the above true. Interestingly enough, the 'voices' are kinda silent on this one.

Well what exactly did you want to see to make it all transparent enough for you?

The police investigated it.
They bought it to trial. Mostly from then on is it not out of their hands?

[Winston001]

I can't believe the issue of the prior convictions is still being argued. Don't you guys read? It was explained ages ago.

Just for clarity - every trial is a fresh case and most of the time, prior convictions won't be admissable. However they are where a defendant makes himself out to be a saint, or he has used the same method for the same previous offense. In other words he has shown a propensity and habit for this particular offence. One previous conviction in different circumstances will certainly not be enough.

The judge has to balance the probative (truth) value against the prejudice to the accused. There are thousands of words written on this complex subject but here is a summary:


(a) “It is undoubtedly not competent for the prosecution to adduce evidence tending to show that the accused has been guilty of criminal acts other than those covered by the indictment, for the purpose of leading to the conclusion that the accused is a person likely from his criminal conduct or character to have committed the offence for which he is being tried”.

(b) “On the other hand, the mere fact that the evidence adduced tends to show the commission of other crimes does not render it inadmissible if it be relevant to an issue before the jury, and it may be so relevant if it bears upon the question whether the acts alleged to constitute the crime charged in the indictment were designed or accidental, or to rebut a defence which would otherwise be open to the accused.”: Makin v Attorney-General for New South Wales [1894] AC 57, 65 per Lord Herschell LC

[MSTRS:Me]

Well what exactly did you want to see to make it all transparent enough for you? The police investigated it. They bought it to trial. Mostly from then on is it not out of their hands?

I hope you meant 'brought' ??
And we are not so naive as to believe that once a trial is underway, no influence can be brought to bear on the proceedings.
The jury made their decision based on evidence heard. Fine. Not everyone believes that this was a 'just' result. Blame other cases for the public's cynicism. Not everyone believes that Peter Ellis was guilty, or Scott Watson, for instance. Or indeed that A A Thomas was innocent for that matter. Do you really think that we would harbour these suspicions if the police were never ever anything but absolutely squeaky-clean??

[The Stranger:Me]

I hope you meant 'brought' ??
And we are not so naive as to believe that once a trial is underway, no influence can be brought to bear on the proceedings.
The jury made their decision based on evidence heard. Fine. Not everyone believes that this was a 'just' result. Blame other cases for the public's cynicism. Not everyone believes that Peter Ellis was guilty, or Scott Watson, for instance. Or indeed that A A Thomas was innocent for that matter. Do you really think that we would harbour these suspicions if the police were never ever anything but absolutely squeaky-clean??

Ok, but you did not address my first question.

What exactly did you want to see to make it all transparent enough for you?

[MSTRS:Me]

Ok, but you did not address my first question.

What exactly did you want to see to make it all transparent enough for you?

Unfair question really.
Without being a fly on the wall overhearing and seeing what went on in the original events, initial complaints, subsequent suspected cover-up, 18years-later complaint, media newsrooms, court, chambers, lawyers' offices, police interview rooms, police bar, LN's bedroom, etc etc...I can see no way that this case could ever be 'transparent' enough.

[spudchucka]

Poke, poke poke..........









Is it dead?

[Hitcher]

Just resting...

[Lou Girardin]

Starting to smell.

[Winston001]

Beautiful plumage.

[Hitcher]

Shut that bloody bouzouki player up!

[Winston001]

Oh, heaven forbid. I am one who delights in all manifestations of the Terpsichorean muse.

No matter. Well, stout yeoman, four ounces of Caerphilly, if you please.

[u4ea]

Oh, heaven forbid. I am one who delights in all manifestations of the Terpsichorean muse.

No matter. Well, stout yeoman, four ounces of Caerphilly, if you please.

you waaaaaaaa???sounds like your going to hell,having halucinaytions,drinking and smoking pot.....................................well probly not much else to do down there aye.....................................

[Ixion]

Pay them no heed, they're from Yorkshire.

What a senseless waste of human life.

(The latter actually seems rather appropriate to this thread , as it was before being hijacked by deranged cheese-sellers)

[u4ea]

yea well they cant help it.....................poor souls....................:slap:

[kickingzebra]

thread hijack?!? That sounds like a crime!! I sense a police CHASE, no wait, PURSUIT coming on... with wierd little two wheeled devices that do 60.... WoOoohooo!!