ARREST!!! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#23

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
And could they opt for a judge only trial if they think the media has tainted the potential jury pool? And if the defence doesn't opt for that, can they complain later about it being tainted?
 
Someone was asking about remand conditions. Keentoknow will have a better idea but my view is this. When the prisoners go into Arthur Gorrie they try to get them into a routine asap to help focus off their troubles and minimise the risk of suicide attempts. Even without hanging points people try all sorts of things to kill themselves such as stuffing toilet rolls down their throat or trying to cut themselves with everything they can pick up. It's an awful mental shock to the system to have your liberty suddenly taken away. The staff discourage too much early communication with friends and family because this can make the new prisoner a bit sooky and emotional and that's a state that is recognied by other inmates who wil then try to take advatnage of the situation by intimidating or standing over the new bloke. It's in their own interest to toughen up a bit early on. If I was a kid the thought of a parent locked away like that would do my head in.
 
Nads said:
And could they opt for a judge only trial if they think the media has tainted the potential jury pool? And if the defence doesn't opt for that, can they complain later about it being tainted?
Click to expand...

No. Must be a jury. There's the potential for an appeal on the grounds that a jury verdict was unsafe and unsound, but that would lead to another trial not a substituted verdict. MOO.
 
Cccclllaareb said:
Not appropriate for me to say. Just think its important to keep in mind that when it comes to media reports you can never think of it as being truly informative in the sense that it doesn't offer a complete perspective.
Click to expand...


Well said....

"Information is not Knowledge"
Albert Einstein
 
willough said:
Thank you Sheldor..."thankyaverymuchindeed :) "....I dont know anything about this aspect. I wonder if the defense team, get the knowledge of what the evidence pieces are before trial.....or whether this is completely kept under wraps by the prosecutor. Then the defense team must on the spot find answers....Hmmmmmm My hubby is good with all this stuff.....and I wouldnt know my bum from my head....lol
Click to expand...

If it's anything like the TV shows, both sides have to have all the information. No surprises. Life IS like Television, isn't it ?? :floorlaugh:
 
Detect said:
If it's anything like the TV shows, both sides have to have all the information. No surprises. Life IS like Television, isn't it ?? :floorlaugh:
Click to expand...
The prosecution must fully disclose their case, including evidence, to the defence, however, the defence does not have a duty of disclosure. This is because the prosecution generally has the upper hand, legally speaking :).
As hawkins said though, they generally communicate particulars of the case back and forward.
HTH.
 
CaseClosed said:
I believe if the prosecution does not reveal all they have to the defence, they do get in trouble for it. The system is supposed to be fair. Hawkins would probably know.
Click to expand...

A couple of relevant quotes from the following link: http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/abou...research/criminalcodedisclosureprovisions.pdf

"The disclosure Chapter in the Criminal Code proceeds (as did the common law) on the basis that 'it is a fundamental obligation of the prosecution to ensure criminal proceedings are conducted fairly with the single aim of determining and establishing truth'.

"... the obligation includes an ongoing obligation for the prosecution to give an accused person full and early disclosure of –
(a) all evidence the prosecution proposes to rely on in the proceeding; and
(b) all things in the possession of the prosecution, other than things the disclosure of which would be unlawful or contrary to the public interest, that would tend to help the case for the accused person."
 
Hawkins said:
The DPP and defence team should and usually do communicate well. The matter first goes to the mags court for a committal. Here the Crown presents most of their evidence in terms of forensics, expert evidence and reports and witness statements. Sometimes the defence will get to do some basic x-examination. The magistrate has to decide whether there is sufficient admissible evidence such that a jury, properly instructed, could convict the accused. If there is then they are off to trial. There's no benefit to anyone at all by trying to hide or withold evidence. The defence gets the lot. How quickly and efficiently that occurs can sometimes vary. The DPP are staffed by top people these days but are still overworked and under resourced in my view only.

At trial the evidence is given and tested in much greater depth, this time for the benefit of a jury. A murder trial is a wonder to watch if you have never seen one live. This wil be an open court so good opportunity to see one. Great seeing the forensic and advocacy skills of the top barristers who work them and the Supreme Court judges too. Can be a bit sad seeing the relatives etc there each day (especially when you have some suporting each side) and a bit surreal if you bump into them in the lifts and coffee shops etc. Same for witnesses. So if you do go, try to be as respectful and conscious of privacy as you can. All IMO MOO.
Click to expand...


Hawkins, I don't think that's entirely true. I've heard of cases where certain evidence has not allowed to be submitted in court.
 
The Dark Shadow said:
The prosecution must fully disclose their case, including evidence, to the defence, however, the defence does not have a duty of disclosure. This is because the prosecution generally has the upper hand, legally speaking :).
As hawkins said though, they generally communicate particulars of the case back and forward.
HTH.
Click to expand...

Thank you Dark Shadow for the clarification, glad you are back with us.

:jail:
 
Hawkins seems to have gone, but does anyone know how attendance at the court for the trial is controlled. I would think that there would be more people wanting to attend the trial, than there are seats. Is it first in best dressed ?? Anyone know ??
 
As the case will be held in an open court, Some aspects of the committal hearing are likely to be reported by MSM. There may be particular points which may be suppressed by the court, however, this is at the discretion of the Judge.
HTH :)
 
Hawkins said:
No. Must be a jury. There's the potential for an appeal on the grounds that a jury verdict was unsafe and unsound, but that would lead to another trial not a substituted verdict. MOO.
Click to expand...

The Criminal Code and Jury and Another Act Amendment Act 2008 allows for judge-only trials in specific circumstances, one of which is "there has been significant pre-trial publicity that may affect jury deliberations".

Page 5 (Part 2, Chapter Division 9A): http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/ACTS/2008/08AC050.pdf

Cheers
 
Hawkins said:
Someone was asking about remand conditions. Keentoknow will have a better idea but my view is this. When the prisoners go into Arthur Gorrie they try to get them into a routine asap to help focus off their troubles and minimise the risk of suicide attempts. Even without hanging points people try all sorts of things to kill themselves such as stuffing toilet rolls down their throat or trying to cut themselves with everyt hing they can pick up. It's an awful mental shock to the system to have your liberty suddenly taken away. The staff discourage too much early communication with friends and family because this can make the new prisoner a bit sooky and emotional and that's a state that is recognied by other inmates who wil then try to take advatnage of the situation by intimidating or standing over the new bloke. It's in their own interest to toughen up a bit early on. If I was a kid the thought of a parent locked away like that would do my head in.
Click to expand...

I could not have put it better......Thats is how it is.
 
Nads said:
So does the public get to know any of the evidence shown at the committal hearing?
Click to expand...

Hawkins said:
No. IMO.
Click to expand...

October 13, 2010

Accused triple killer Max Sica will face a murder trial after one of the longest committal hearings in Queensland history.

Following 95 days of evidence, Magistrate Brian Hine this morning ordered the 40-year-old to stand trial for the murders

Magistrate Hine told Brisbane Magistrates Court there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find Mr Sica guilty.

"What this court determines is if there is, on the evidence offered, a case not sufficient or sufficient to put the defendant on trial," he said


"On all the evidence before me, there is evidence capable of supporting a verdict of guilty. That will be a question for the jury."

The hearing heard explosive evidence

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...gh-siblings-20101013-16ii0.html#ixzz1xpgIalVi

A lot of this "explosive evidence" was all reported in main stream media at the time back in 2010...the actual trial didn't begin until this year.
 
Hawkins said:
No. IMO.
Click to expand...
Hi Hawkins, I am interested in why you think the MSM won't report on committal proceedings? Unless the preliminary will be a paper committal?!?! I am personally not aware of any media restrictions on prelims, besides court imposed.
Sorry, i am not questioning your obvious wisdom on this subject, i just don't want to be giving the wrong advice/info :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 179 more.
Total: 2,071 (members: 180, guests: 1,891)

Online statistics

Members online
180
Guests online
1,891
Total visitors
2,071
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,693
Messages
18,208,599
Members
233,936
Latest member
ChillThrills
Back
Top