Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: The Roache Summing Up - By TwitFeed
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
JK2006 |
Agreed Honey but unfortunately, by the time the first trial started (after all "legal argument" before it) "maps" didn't matter as I'd agreed I'd met 4 of the 5 men and "maps" were neither here nor there... haha. |
|
honey!oh sugar sugar. |
JK2006 wrote:
Ah my lawyers wouldn't say it because it didn't imply collusion between witnesses but corruption by police ("I'll just pop out for a quick pee" leaving previous "maps" on the table, "just draw your map now").Since that could not be proved, the Judge would ban it.
But a jury trip to your house would have allowed them to reach their own conclusions. |
|
JK2006 |
Ah my lawyers wouldn't say it because it didn't imply collusion between witnesses but corruption by police ("I'll just pop out for a quick pee" leaving previous "maps" on the table, "just draw your map now").Since that could not be proved, the Judge would ban it. |
|
Anon |
JK2006 wrote:
Yes; several "witnesses"in my trial - who I had never met and had never been to my house - drew very similar "maps" of my house, including rooms that were not there and doors leading "into" them - all very like other drawings (equally false).
That sounds like strong evidence if collusion between accusers...  |
|
Anon |
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
 "Judge: the prosecution say the victim's story is supported by the fact she was able to describe in detail the room where it happened..."
So can I! his house has been repeatedly featured in the Radio times and Woman's weekly.
Good point and can they be sure someone else who'd been there never fed them those descriptions? I don't think so... |
|
|
|
