Just like BAIN?Originally Posted by Toaster
Get Karam onto it.
Blame the dead fella and call it murder (of her by him) and suicide (by jumping into the tide weighted down).
SOLVED!!!
Tornado Alley
Just like BAIN?
Get Karam onto it.
Blame the dead fella and call it murder (of her by him) and suicide (by jumping into the tide weighted down).
SOLVED!!!
Weapons of Mass Acceleration
Yes of course!!!
Poor Watson finding all their blood on his boat and trying to merely clean up the mess and forgetting to tell the police about it. Must be innocent.
Una Storia Italiana
There was no blood and his sister gave him a hand to repaint... she saw the condition of the boat before it was started... just like it was her kids that scratched the 'polystyrene' under the hatch (suposed the missing did it trying to escape... farking joke.
cheers DD
(Definately Dodgy)
The instructions are simple...
Really? Where is it? And what? I vaguely recall talk of a single hair that might have belonged to the girl...But I don't remember it being confirmed.
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
Hardcore Biker
Rest of post based on assumption its fairly evident Watson is proved innocent or innocent of sole involvement... (I do think he knows something or saw something... but has been intimidated into not pushing his case forward on that basis)
You can't just lock up people for being perves or freaks much as the idea appeals. The stitch up was so well orchestrated by cops and legal qualified devos one might ask who in the drug trade (and at what level) was being protected. Especialy if Olivia was raped... we know Watsons Judge (may he rot in hell) has opined in rape trials that knives must not be seen as prejudicial but could be used to encourage valid legal consent so its not like he'd care about truth and justice.... prevailing.
Well I'd ask who was being protected anyway, just in the knowledge of local context and that even the CHCH drug biz from the 70's forward was well invested in by young lawyers seeking high return on investment, who these days be liberals sitting pretty under lamby wigs or MPs.
My first port of inquiry would be checking central characters ie cops and lawyers for asset swelling around the time of the trial. Hard to check as NZ a last place where accounts could be opened no ID and Muldoon sert up bonus bonds to sweep in the black economy (attracting foreign launderers and drug moneys). I'm just saying use Occams; Judge Herons and many others rather calculated "we're gonna getcha" behaviour is pretty hard to explain as just being motivated by any normal legal training.... good detective work would seek to identify or eliminate motives for aberrant courtroom activity by Judges / prossies. Watson - the fall guy for some untouchables?
If so another question to explore is who (that acted suspiciously in stitching up Watson) has pissed off out of the country to a high life overseas and below the radar. Unfortunately for Watson things often only emerge with time. Its sad the prolly well heeled killers and accessories afterthe fact got away laughing - most of all for the victims.
I'm told by reliable people they offered to give affadavits regarding Olivia selling pot but investigators declined it as red herrings. It could be key - why not follow this avenue - WHY. I'd say because it is known by case officianados who did it or that Watson didn't and that info never mattered. Our underbelly has many not so secret secrets.
Remember the Hunter book is more concerned to get an inquiry to cirruption generally than is a Jo Karam type personality driven crusade. My theory is the local bent cop and affiliated legal eagle got a message saying "Dear bizzo associate, some unexpected visitors rubbed up our bumboys the wrong way and met with an accident, please assist so as not to disturb operations as I'm sure you would not want to get dragged into this mess - as IF in we go down so do you, yours truly, your drug haulage partners". Look for the white collar psychopaths not the blue collar local f-wit.
Hardcore Biker
powder sparking
L-Plate Rider
The following letter was sent to the three judges of the Court of Appeal, there has been neither acknowledgment or response of any sort. See if you can figure out why.
26 August 2007
Sir Ivor Richardson
cc Dame Sian Elias, Chief Justice
Dear Sir Ivor
Re: The Appeal in R v Watson, 1999.
I am the author and publisher of Trial By Trickery, a book on the justice system and its treatment of Scott Watson. I enclose a copy. I also enclose a DVD copy of the television documentary Murder On The Blade?, which was broadcast on Television One on 7 November 2003.
I write in respect of your part in declining Watson’s appeal in 1999.
While there are many matters I would draw your attention to, I refer you in particular to chapters Six and Eight of the book and to Part Three of the Film. The book chapters relate to ‘The Two Trip Theory’ and to Watson’s appeal, and the film segment to identification issues.
I remind you first that in your judgment you stated:
In summing up, the trial Judge clearly treated the Wallace evidence as visual identifications of the appellant not only on the water taxi but also on earlier occasions at the Lodge. It therefore becomes apparent that the Crown, defence, and the trial Judge all regarded (Guy) Wallace as having made a visual identification of the appellant. It is beyond question that the case against him depended substantially on the correctness of those identifications, because if they were incorrect the Crown case was seriously undermined .
I ask that you then consider the following passage in Part Three of the film, where eyewitness Guy Wallace makes the following answers, in person, to questions posed by the film:
NARRATOR: If someone had pointed, not at the photograph in Montage B but at Watson himself in court and then asked Guy Wallace if this was the mystery man what would he have said?
WALLACE “I would have said obviously not”
NARRATOR Why?
WALLACE “Because he is not the mystery man..”
NARRATOR Was Scott Watson the man in the water taxi that night or not?
WALLACE “Definitely not.”
You will find elsewhere, in both film and book, a discussion of identification issues and the retraction by Wallace and other key eyewitness of their testimony at trial on the grounds that they were misled by what is essentially a trick photograph.
Secondly, please note the following passage in your judgment:
The two trip theory must have been a possible Crown contention from the outset, and certainly became so as matters developed in the way the defence anticipated they might. Mr Antunovic submitted that the so-called late acknowledgement by the Crown on this point impacted adversely on the defence. It was suggested that more extensive cross-examination of the witnesses who were on board the "Mina Cornelia" and the "Bianco" as to the timing of the appellant’s return with Mr Anderson would have been undertaken. Similarly as regards the witnesses to the Perkins incident ashore, and the absence of evidence as to how the appellant may have returned to the shore. But an examination of the transcript shows that there was extensive cross-examination on those issues.
Your final statement above, ‘… an examination of the transcript shows that there was extensive cross-examination on those issues..’ is incorrect. There is no such cross examination at all. In particular, the question of a return by Watson to shore is entirely absent from the transcript of the trial. It is to be found only in the final address to the jury by the Crown Prosecutor, and there only in the words the prosecutor spoke on the second and final day of that address. An examination of the transcript shows in fact that Watson was convicted on a murder scenario of which neither he nor the jury had been aware until that moment.
Scott Watson’s conviction, by your own judgment, has been ‘seriously undermined’ by Guy Wallace on nationwide television. Even more importantly, he was convicted after being kept unaware, throughout his whole trial, of what he was alleged to have done. For that reason only, he had not mounted a defence against it. The book shows that in fact evidence was available which readily absolves him. Instead, he was tried and convicted on a secret charge. I’m sure you will agree that there can be no greater evil in any justice system than this.
I’m also sure you will find Watson’s continued imprisonment unacceptable in view of these and other issues raised in book and film, and that you will take immediate steps to have Scott Watson treated with the justice he has so far been denied.
I look forward to your response to this letter and its information to you. The letter has also been sent to your colleagues who sat with you in R v Watson, Gault J and Henry J, and has also been copied along with the book and film to the Chief Justice, Dame Sian Elias. It will be posted on the website trialbytrickery.com along with any response you care to make.
Yours Faithfully,
Keith Hunter
Una Storia Italiana
Farking good post, worth a quote
cheers DD
(Definately Dodgy)
Hardcore Biker
Hehe, thats actually quite funny and well done, nice piss take on the conspiracy loonies.
Una Storia Italiana
open your eyes...
life and infact the world is based around a conspiracy, money that dosnt exist, greed and human nature.
cheers DD
(Definately Dodgy)
L-Plate Rider
I think you have youre head in the sand man, Or youre biased for some reason, its ok though your not alone and there has tobe two sides at least
Wearing Hi-Viz Black.
He certainly did well. I'd hate to think how much of that investment is drug money.
TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
Weapons of Mass Acceleration
Anyone like to explain the presence of two human dna samples taken from the boat that were not his? The significant amount of human blood residue found, the blood on the matresses that wasnt his, the nail finger marks that wasnt his either........... nothing happened there obviously, just another innocent boatie... yeah right.
Slapper?
All that aside,no doubt the fucker didnt wave,reason enough to bang him up for the duration methinks.Should ave just strung him up and be done with it,save a little room in cyberspace at least.
Be the person your dog thinks you are...
Hardcore Biker
Okay, well, for what its worth this is my take on the case. If he's behind bars, he must have done something to be there. If he is innocent why hasn't a royal commission of inquiry been launched.
If he is innocent, the truth will come out, hopefully lol. Either way, I knew watson, he wasn't a nice fellow.....
The thing that intrigues me is all the conflicting accounts of witnesses that seem to agree with each other and not the police....... Odd but not unfounded.
Bain case, well, the whole family were messed up, I wouldn't have blamed David blowin away his old man for what he did to the family, however I think David most likely came home to it at the end. Maybe we will never know, but David didn't deserve to be locked up on the evidence the police had. The case wouldn't have stuck for todays standards.
I am freindly really, I only bite when provoked
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks