15-10-2016, 21:37
(This post was last modified: 15-10-2016, 21:40 by St Charles Owl.)
(15-10-2016, 19:33)madsteve Wrote: Was it correct that the jury wasn't aware that two witnesses were offered £50k by Evans' fiancee to change their testaments for the latest trial?
Worse still perhaps, that the judge felt this was acceptable.
The latest re-trial doesn't prove Ched is innocent, only that on the balance of probability, there wasn't overwhelming proof of his guilt. The girl involved has never changed her testament, she has always said that she remembers nothing. The difference this time was that the jury believed his view that she was consenting.
No if thats the case then that isn't right but my point was the use of character witnesses is used all the time in trials, thats what these statements were. Also I agree with your last paragraph but this also highlights the problem with trials like this, as there is no physical, irrefutable evidence it comes down to judgement and opinion based on what the jury is given and yes this time the jury believed him. He has got this over turned on a technicality, not on proof of innocence.
(15-10-2016, 19:55)peiowl Wrote: I don't disagree with you on everything but currently the law does!! At the end of the day many of these sort of trials are based on one persons word against another with little to no evidence of outright positive proof of innocence or guilt!! Therefore inevitably the general character of both the accused and the accuser has to become part of any trial. In this one, the behaviour of the woman on that night was shown to be consistent with her behaviour a few nights earlier and less than two weeks after the Evans incident, that iformation surely does have some relevance in this case??
"The law is an ass. (Dickens)" See my comment to imre. It's only the behavior on the night not "a few nights earlier" that should have counted in determining innocence or guilt. And no, it has no relevance whatsoever. A disturbing precedent has been set. Wouldn't surprise me if the judge's decision to allow this kind of evidence were challenged.
http://yoursportsfeeder.com/2016/10/15/c...acquitted/
[/quote]
Its never the one incident that counts, as I said above character witnesses are called all the time, both for and against each party. This case sets a disturbing precedent either way.