Search results

While sharing the alarm about some jurors, i don't find the above question stupid (i almost said "unreasonable" ... :-)). On the contrary, i find the judge's reply disappointing, as the question deserved and could have been given a better one. I tend to think of it along the lines of "short of...

The trustworthiness (to 'N&J') is made up; the treacherousness (to HB&B) is real.

Yes, some of my friends used to be culpates - and cavates too, probably. (I won't mention the onerates.)

> If you identify with these 10 signs, you’re most likely being gaslighted. Wow, powerful checklist there, thanks.

Ok then, in the face of overwhelming arm-twisting (as in .. "if you know what's good for you, mate"), here it is: ... Helen Bailey was murdered by Ian Stewart when they were both alone in the house, and then lied to her friends, police and family that she had gone ... It reads as "... was...

There's a one-word slip in there (harmless, though initially startling :-)), on the part of Judge Bright or Tara (or my computer screen, though it seems to persist :-)).

Yes there is always the possibility of misquote, given the pressure of real-time court reporting.

Strangely poor wording for the Defense to end with. Surely the best closing remark always is a reminder that verdicts must pivot on "reasonable doubt" - i.e. that "probably" guilty, or even "very probably", is not enough to convict. I'm talking in general here - not suggesting that there is...

That remark must be the 'richest' yet. (In fairness to SRF, i have undone Tara's excision of "far more" in her title-line quote.)

That's the reasoning behind why he chooses to refer to these sightings. I meant what's the reasoning to support his assertion that they are "undoubtedly true"?

What's the reasoning here? "These witnesses are not wrong ... " What is supposed to establish that they're not wrong? The fact that they said it? Or something else - if so, what?

Just wondering what kind of half-way promising line might have been possible ... << Look, if I'd really wanted to get shot of her ... i mean, you know, carry out a murder of her ... d'you really think that I would've disposed of the body in a tank here in the grounds of my ... sorry, i mean our...

... or of course to convince a couple of them that there's a chance that he's innocent.

I was wondering whether the following would be an over-simplification or an accurate statement of the decision facing the jury: IS is guilty beyond reasonable doubt if and only if the N&J story is false beyond reasonable doubt.

Re not sedated: i was wondering how much room there is for that possibility, given the pathologist's "no signs of struggle" finding? For HB to be overcome while conscious, without significant struggle, we have to imagine either 1) good physical condition for IS, or 2) his successfully carrying...

Good point. (Nic(e)ly noticed :-).)

Well spotted! A gem (or jaffa to cricket enthusiasts) of sleuthing, there.

Scraped degree v. no degree: my experience suggests the former as the more negative indicator. (That's not to deny that there have been brilliant people who 'took a Third'.)

I think the toy was found inside a pillow-case though.

Theoretical now of course, but i wonder how the police would have proceeded if the right tank had gone undiscovered - which it nearly did...