Cliff Hardy
fictional investigator
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2018
- Messages
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 11,235
Cross a future in comedy off your list.Perhaps I should go back to uni although if I can't convince you guys those high fees will remain out of reach...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Cross a future in comedy off your list.Perhaps I should go back to uni although if I can't convince you guys those high fees will remain out of reach...
We can only guess but my guess is that things currently sit at around 10-2 or 11-1 for guilty and the majority are asking the minority to reconsider some of the evidence in the hope a unanimous verdict can be reached.What is everyone thinking the jury are specifically looking for when reviewing the footage? Or do you think they just want to simply go over it again?
MOO
Hopefully then if you were ever caught up in a scenario like GL describes, you’d have the foresight not to destroy every shred of evidence that could prove your version of events.You really think so? They haven't proven either of the above beyond a reasonable doubt to me.
- The act causing death was performed consciously, voluntarily and deliberately by the accused
- The accused performed the act causing death intending to kill the other person or intending to cause that person at least really serious injury;
The prosecution has literally no account of his actions during the deaths. I don't know if it's some morbidity thing but a lot of people are scary quick to vote guilty. I certainly wouldn't want you on my jury if I was innocent in an unlikely scenario, which can and do happen all the time.
That's all and good if you are indeed innocent but if a person you are trying to claim fell on a knife also has a bullet hole in his head, well...Hopefully then if you were ever caught up in a scenario like GL describes, you’d have the foresight not to destroy every shred of evidence that could prove your version of events.
If things did in fact go down like GL says they did, there would have been an abundance of evidence that would have absolutely absolved him had it been reported and documented when it happened, so I guess it’s a lesson for us all to not remove, burn, smash up into fragments and hide peoples remains if we ever had the inclination to do so following a terrible accident.
What is everyone thinking the jury are specifically looking for when reviewing the footage? Or do you think they just want to simply go over it again?
MOO
Justice Croucher told the jury Lynn and Senior Constable Griffiths had not been given an opportunity to respond to multiple allegations put to them by Mr Porceddu in his closing address.
On Friday, Justice Croucher took aim at Crown prosecutor Daniel Porceddu for breaking the well established rules of 'fairness' in his closing address.
'The rule of fairness was breached by Mr Porceddu when making arguments to you,' he told the jury.
'Had Mr Porceddu asked Mr Lynn these questions, put these propositions to him, Mr Lynn may well have been able to respond in a powerful and convincing way.'
The jury heard Mr Porceddu made the mistake of making submissions in his closing address that he did not give Lynn an opportunity to answer while he was in the witness box last week.
Lynn had provided police with 1057 pieces of information and prosecutors had not proven that one of them was a lie.
That what I think too. From what I've read IMO it's not just a slip of the finger to get that gun to fireIf it were me, I'd want to check the likelihood of the weapon being accidentally fired in a scuffle - ie what failsafe mechanisms are there on that weapon which would be likely to prevent such an action occurring.
What does a user have to do to actually get the weapon to fire? (IIRC, a reasonable amount of effort is required - it wouldn't just fire if it were bumped for example)
JMO
I remember Alec Baldwin trying to make it all go away by claiming he didn't pull the trigger and after forensic examination it was determined the only way the gun in question would fire is if you did pull the trigger.That what I think too. From what I've read IMO it's not just a slip of the finger to get that gun to fire
That what I think too. From what I've read IMO it's not just a slip of the finger to get that gun to fire
I remember Alec Baldwin trying to make it all go away by claiming he didn't pull the trigger and after forensic examination it was determined the only way the gun in question would fire is if you did pull the trigger.
Sounds like a sequence of very fortunate events.What are the odds , you get into an "altercation" with someone with a gun & knife, 2 people end up dead & you get NO injuries. Very lucky??
Unbelievably fortunate events at thatSounds like a sequence of very fortunate events.
Unbelievably fortunate events at that
The glass half full view is we are a day closer to a verdict.Maybe tomorrow.
That what I think too. From what I've read IMO it's not just a slip of the finger to get that gun to fire