Actually, I regret to inform, obviously, the Appeal statement wasn't quite clear, as you claim, otherwise why would it be disputed from one end of the country to the other? . No one disputes a 'clear' verdict. Everyone knows that. ..
It isn't that uncommon when an Appeals verdict is different from a jury verdict and is disputed when it doesn't bring up new evidence and merely relies on interpretation of the evidence given. Which, if I may remind you, was adjudged by a jury to be evidence of murderous intent. .
Only when new evidence is given is an appeal likely to succeed. As is perfectly obvious, and goes without stating, however, state it I will, this appeal under discussion has attempted to do exactly that. Conclude a new verdict without new evidence/ re-interpret the evidence a jury has already found to portray murderous intent.
Hence, it is most likely to be re appealed by the DPP and most likely be put aside, and our boy Gerard will be whistling Dixie until 2030 when he applies for bail and gets knocked back because he just cant bring himself to tell the truth about his wife's murder.
Because, as you know, parole relies very much on R.E.M.O.R.S.E. .. something that Gerard has yet to grasp.