Interesting development ...

Just shows that some will plead guilty when they know the weight of evidence against them?

It is generally believed, ITK, that nobody ever pleads guilty unless they are. I can tell you this is not the case. If advised by lawyers the chances are against you, and told (see my letter to the judges) that a guilty plea will vastly reduce your sentence, many WILL plead guilty to crimes they did not commit.

JK2006 wrote:
It is generally believed, ITK, that nobody ever pleads guilty unless they are. I can tell you this is not the case. If advised by lawyers the chances are against you, and told (see my letter to the judges) that a guilty plea will vastly reduce your sentence, many WILL plead guilty to crimes they did not commit.

I'm quite sure that is true ....

If the case (for whatever reason) seems so heavily "stacked" against you does it not make sense (I'm asking myself here) to get a lower sentence or languish in jail for considerably longer whilest protesting innocence?

Hard decision to make.

there could be many reasons for pleading guilty- because you are, the sentence issue as JK points out or the fact you could be found innocent but be financially destroyed and choose jail time instead etc etc and so on.

I still say (and when have I been wrong?)- this is the 'establishment' putting Rupert in his place and as it always has been, will be forever thus as that other great thinker Tony Benn has said.

why an Antipodean carpetbagger thought he could prevail forever in the UK is a mystery but Murdoch is being driven out of the UK because whilst he produced results for the Thatchers & Blairs he also decided he was The Most Powerful Man in Britain, yet he is not.

and so he has decamped to his new personal feifdom in the South from whence he came where he has installed a gormless London born cretin as a puppet ruler.