July 20, 201213 yr The policeman charged with killing an innocent bystander. Good article in today's Telegraph. If someone could link please....or I will add tomorrow. Not guilty!! Well when you readhis record..hmmmm...?
July 20, 201213 yr this it? - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9414115/Ian-Tomlinson-family-to-sue-Met-Police-unless-they-recieve-admission-of-guilt.html
July 20, 201213 yr Author Similar...thanks for the link boater. In today's Telegraph there is mention of allegations of kneeing a suspect in the groin and other brutality. Makes you wonder when this evidence only comes to light after the verdict.
July 20, 201213 yr Similar...thanks for the link boater. In today's Telegraph there is mention of allegations of kneeing a suspect in the groin and other brutality. Makes you wonder when this evidence only comes to light after the verdict. Because he was being tried for his actions on the day and only the day. What happened before, unless he uses it for his own defence, is inadmissible.
July 21, 201213 yr Smokie is referring to propensity evidence, which can only be admitted in certain very limited circumstances. As Limpy said, it is usually inadmissible - otherwise a person accused of a crime could have his priors read out in the course of their trial as evidence of his propensity to commit the crime. It (usually) adds nothing of probative value and can be damaging (prejudicial) in the minds of lay people (the jurors).
July 21, 201213 yr According to yesterday's Times the plod was a real monster. He was due to have a disciplinary hearing for an off duty road rage incident and resigned on 'health grounds' to avoid it. 3 days later he rejoined the plod as a civilian. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/pc-simon-harwood-not-guilty-but-no-innocent-7960149.html
July 23, 201213 yr Author If the criteria were balance of probability then i reckon this guy would have been found guilty.
July 23, 201213 yr If the criteria were balance of probability then i reckon this guy would have been found guilty. no doubt
July 23, 201213 yr If the criteria were balance of probability then i reckon this guy would have been found guilty. no doubt And if the jury was presented with the press reports rather than the evidence, the trial would have taken only 10 minutes.
July 23, 201213 yr Unfortunately, in my view, UK law is based on the burden of proof, beyond doubt, there was doubt, he was rightly aquitted. The family are suggesting a civil case, which will be based on the balance of probabilities amongst other things, but I wouldn't hold my breath for a guilty verdict. I would target my attack on the Police and their disregard of his previous form, if not convictions, because they either turned Nelsons eye, or allowed get out clauses.
July 23, 201213 yr If the criteria were balance of probability then i reckon this guy would have been found guilty. no doubt And if the jury was presented with the press reports rather than the evidence, the trial would have taken only 10 minutes. As Moss Bros just said, the Civil Case will be based on this standard of proof. The press lies/fantasy will be inadmissible ...................so we will see
Create an account or sign in to comment