Opinionsgalore
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2012
- Messages
- 306
- Reaction score
- 0
If I were a defence lawyer, trying the Stillnox defence, I would be saying that my client had taken the drug, and I would have no idea if his father had taken it too. And maybe the father DOES have full recollection, which is why he refuses to cooperate with the QPS? But the point, from the defence point of view, would be that GBC would have been operating under the effects of the drug.
Pure hypothesis, of course, but it has been documented, and there is even precedence in court.
The guilt or otherwise of another party is currently not in question, in legal terms as far as I know (no other arrests have been made) and even if it were, the Stillnox defence may still apply to GBC's alleged actions that night.
Just a possibility - I hope they don't try that one. But if they do, as I mentioned above, then ALL proof of what GBC is alleged to have done becomes irrelevant if the Stillnox effects are accepted by the court.....
Personally, I have to say that the adverse effects of Stillnox have probably been hyped out of all proportion by the media, to the point where is have become a very convenient drug with extremely convenient side effects. But that's just cynical old moi....!
Is Stillnox a short term relaxant (can you clarify), that it induces sleep for 4 hours, but does not maintain sleep ? In cases where the Stillnox claims have been used, in what period of time were they claiming the 'Stillnox effect' ? Within the first 4 hours or longer ?
This is MOO.