King of Hits.co.uk - Your Views Messageboard

IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Home

Forums

	Messageboards	Categories Show latest posts

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register. Lost Password?

Messageboards

King of Hits

Your Views Messageboard

Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"

Name:

Subject:

Boardcode:

Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons





More Smilies

Enter code here

Topic History of: National Press ignoring this POLICE stitch up
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
veritas	SJB wrote: Jim wrote: But part of the process of law is that it should be open. That's why I'd like to know the details. I'd like to know too. The case seemed a fairly simple one, so the point of law upon which the appeal is based is not immediately apparent. quite right but the only way would be to view the trial transcript. In fact the report is entirely inadequate and I bet the reporter wasn't even there. I often sit in on senstational cases just to watch the theatre but points of law made by barrister sare quite fascinating. We are beholden to a shrinking corporatised media that feeds us the mundane. Politicians have abandoned the notion of holding the media to account. They are given an extraordinary freedom and power yet no demands of responsibility are demanded by our leaders.
SJB	Jim wrote: But part of the process of law is that it should be open. That's why I'd like to know the details. I'd like to know too. The case seemed a fairly simple one, so the point of law upon which the appeal is based is not immediately apparent.
Jim	Thanks Veritas, you write: "not supporting the accused, just the process of law" Agreed. But part of the process of law is that it should be open. That's why I'd like to know the details. Best Wishes, Jim
veritas	Jim wrote: Thanks Veritas, you write: "[P]resumably his barrister presented a pretty good case for a re-trial and it is a judge(s) that decides if that happens. All on points of law I suppose." This is a reasonable hope, but I would want the details so I can judge for myself, and the article doesn't provide them. Best Wishes, Jim Hi Jim-not supporting the accused, just the process of law. Although it may seem harsh he is still on full pay etc that doesn;t seem a problem to me. I have sympathy for the woman as any appearance in a court is highly stressful.
Jim	Thanks Veritas, you write: "[P]resumably his barrister presented a pretty good case for a re-trial and it is a judge(s) that decides if that happens. All on points of law I suppose." This is a reasonable hope, but I would want the details so I can judge for myself, and the article doesn't provide them. Best Wishes, Jim