Not guilty (Police sex case verdict, 1 March)

[98tls]

After just watching the news and seeing rickards wife doing the tearful woe is me shit outside the court..........what a crock of shit.........lets not forget the bitch went to the trouble of trying to coach her own family about what to say in court...........

[terbang]

I think people will hopefully make their own opinions given the past history of the trio as to the proclaimed 'innocence' of Rickards and co. Being found not guilty does not always equate to innocence, it just means what it does in this case that there was insufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

That is it. And now I see Rickard on TV crowing about going back to his old job and bla bla bla about those that investigated him. Jeez if he does then we will have a known (not convicted) rapist running our police force.. Pffft what a joke...

[SixPackBack]

Rickard has just butt fucked himself......slagging the investigative team off and claiming to be good friends with Schollum and co. in spite of the fact they are serving 8 years for treating a young lady "like a piece of meat" [and self confessed to the crime]

Rickard your guilty of the Louise case the whole country knows it.

[s8306]

I don't normally go pro-police (especially in any reference to driving!) & I knew at least one real arrogant & powerhungry egotistical a/holes that joined up but in this case I want to say that I grew up in the same area as Clinton and he wasn't one of those types. I found it hard to imagine that he would do the crime he was accused of. I didn't know him well but he never really seemed to be the sort of person that would do ANYTHING bad (& that was before there were any political gains to be had). He always seemed to be a really good guy (if not a little quiet, serious & stern looking) and a community orientated leader (his judo days should attest to that). I guess we never really know people even if we are close to them but even though I haven't followed the trial closely from here in Aus and I haven't seen him since around the early seventies an accusation like this just didn't add up in my mind. The others? Well, my guess is as good as yours.

So, yes I also wonder if there was some sort of an ambush going on. I'm not pro or anti Maori but I am pro good people and Clinton just seemed to be one way back when...

I seem to remember people saying similar things like that about OJ Simpson,but we all know the prick did it.

[spudchucka]

When I said they were guilty as, apparently I was fucking pyschic! Turns out that the louise nichols case and this one werent the first.. They were already serving time for yet another rape.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/...ectid=10426475

Police sex trial: What the jury never knew

Do you really think that the jury was so stupid that they never noticed Rickards was coming and going via the front door but the others made their entry & exit via the back door?

Do you also think that none of the Jury had any idea as to their incarceration after the shambles that followed the Nicholas verdict?

I've got no time for any of these men but the reality is that the whole affair is a joke!

[spudchucka]

After just watching the news and seeing rickards wife doing the tearful woe is me shit outside the court..........what a crock of shit.........lets not forget the bitch went to the trouble of trying to coach her own family about what to say in court...........

That was allegedly Mrs Shipton, not Mrs Rickards.

[98tls]

That was allegedly Mrs Shipton, not Mrs Rickards.

Whoops.........cheers i thought it was Rickards mrs.

[SixPackBack]

Obviously the site Police intend to stick by Rickards side regardless.

Have the balls to admit it fellas, the Louise case smelt real bad.

[spudchucka]

Obviously the site Police intend to stick by Rickards side regardless.

Have the balls to admit it fellas, the Louise case smelt real bad.

Go back three or four posts, I just said I have no time for any of them. Apparently in your world that means sticking by him regardless??

Bottom line on CR for me, I don't trust him, I don't want him in the police, I don't believe he is totally innocent but I don't believe that the complainant's can be 100% believed either.

I never thought that either case had sufficient compelling evidence to convict them. I suspect that the whole thing has been about who they are, not what they are alleged to have done.

[98tls]

Obviously the site Police intend to stick by Rickards side regardless.

Have the balls to admit it fellas, the Louise case smelt real bad.

Mate he did say he wanted nothing to do with any of them.........am interested in his opinion just like anyone elses.......as far as im concerned i really dont give a rats what anyone does for a living.....on here we are all just motorcyclists..........

[avgas]

reality is that the whole affair is a joke!

And all the pacific islanders are laughing

[Maha]

I did Jury service once (as lot of you probably have also) and it was a class 'B' drug case, when the accused was brought in, and i made eye contact with him i thought, Guilty! He was caught with a large amount of cash, a set of scales, snaplock bags and drugs, the first jury retirement, a show of hands was ordered, and it was about 7/5 in favour of Guilty. As the trial went on there was quite a bit of doubt thrown into my mind, and others, because of the way things are said and how the Judge guides you. We were there to convict or acquit on possession for supply, he had already been convicted on possession, no question, they had photos and evidence. To cut a long story short, we found him Not Guilty of Supply and were happy the drugs were for his own use, had he offered drugs to someone at the house he was at, at the time of arrest, then would be deemed as Supply (judge's words) but they couldn't prove that...Amazing how the law works....and lawyers!

[SixPackBack]

Apologies gents..my bad. Indeed you do appear neutral Spud.

[98tls]

I did Jury service once (as lot of you probably have also) and it was a class 'B' drug case, when the accused was brought in, and i made eye contact with him i thought, Guilty! He was caught with a large amount of cash, a set of scales, snaplock bags and drugs, the first jury retirement, a show of hands was ordered, and it was about 7/5 in favour of Guilty. As the trial went on there was quite a bit of doubt thrown into my mind, and others, because of the way things are said and how the Judge guides you. We were there to convict or acquit on possession for supply, he had already been convicted on possession, no question, they had photos and evidence. To cut a long story short, we found him Not Guilty of Supply and were happy the drugs were for his own use, had he offered drugs to someone at the house he was at, at the time of arrest, then would be deemed as Supply (judge's words) but they couldn't prove that...Amazing how the law works....and lawyers!

Agreed mate........a bit off topic but man the coppers must get pissed off with the justice system and how it works.......or doesnt.

[Maha]

Agreed mate........a bit off topic but man the coppers must get pissed off with the justice system and how it works.......or doesnt.

My feelings on todays verdict?........the crown didn't do their homework, and unless you were there and heard every bit of evidence, or at the scene 20 whatever years ago, then one can only make judgement on gut feeling, and thats not how the law works, dont get me wrong im with most others in that, they got probably got it wrong but its a done deal now...