You know you’re in Peru when something working as expected is headline-worthy!
I’m surprised Bob hasnt been posting about it already, but the trial of the century is currently being heard in Liverpool Crown.
Not the voyager paint case, not Lucy letby round two, this is the big one:
The three handed ABH of the three Asian men in Manchester airport!
That’s right it’s a three defendant ABH, why is it notable? Because it’s being prosecuted by King’s Counsel leading a junior of 19 years’ call.
KC and Junior, for a three-handed ABH… It’s insanity.
This the three completely going not guilty, even though the video is pretty self explanatory…
1 Like
Yeah…
In normal speak?
The Crown really can’t afford to mess it up though, the “2 Tier” crowd would have a field day and we all know CPS stands for Couldn’t Prosecute Satan.
2 Likes
Playing devils advocate, Satan only tempts & encourages as per his assigned job description from almighty.
It’s the most basic of crimes ever, low consequences, play CCTV. Should be prosecuted by one level two or three crown prosecutor, maybe between 5 and 10 years’ experience.
The trial fee would be about £1,077 plus VAT and a daily rate for the prosecutor. This is what we do day in, day out for them.
Instead, because this case became high profile, the CPS have employed two very senior barristers to prosecute it. This bumps the cost up to trial fees of £3,200 and £6,000 plus VAT (ish) for junior and Silk respectively,
With a daily cost of about £1,500 plus VAT.
It’s complete and total overkill, and the worst but, is that juries know it’s overkill, they know these defendants are effectively being singled out because they, or their case, is famous, and they don’t like it. Oddly increasing the chances of acquittals.
I’ve lost clearer cut cases to juries. One took them less than 5 minutes and the defendant basically admitted it wasn’t self defence. Jury clearly thought the guy deserved it.
I think that is case dependent, most juris don’t know the difference between a KC and any other sort of prosecutor, their knowledge of Crown Court mostly comes from watching Kavanagh.
Where they do tend to catch on is when people have been massively overcharged, which this hasn’t been, I half expected to see a Violent Disorder slapped on as well.
1 Like
The feeling in Bristol is that the jury knew Ben Stokes et al were being over prosecuted and that that fact attributed to his acquittal. But at least he could afford equality of arms.
Well…these posts aren’t making me laugh much !!
…come on chaps, where’s the funny stuff!
1 Like
Conspiracy to (insert crime) is still a crime, doesn’t matter if God told him to, He still has to answer to Charlie!!
MML. Anti-vaxxers.
Was just giving some support to a parent who seemed perfectly normal… until they described how “it’s only since I had my kids vaccinated [aged 2 months] that they developed autism”.
I assume you got up and left, that case must be unsupportable.
Because the case isn’t finished and is ongoing as we speak. I will be interested in what the jury concludes and what the IOPC come up with regarding the officers use of his feet.
When Brize happened no-one had been arrested and remanded into custody.
I’m sure as a member of the legal profession that you know commenting could predjuice a case.
In the Letby there is enough doubt in my view how the case was presented by an ‘expert’ witness to make the conviction’ unsafe’ in particular when you hear the words of the panel of experts who examined the medical case for the Crown.
1 Like
Yeah, us chatting about it on here isn’t going to influence a jury.
Otherwise why bother reporting on ongoing cases at all?
1 Like
Fairly confident that should a member of said jury be present here on ACC they would have the common sense as a likely member of ATC/CCF to disengage themselves from this thread.