- Joined
- May 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,283
- Reaction score
- 2,549
Safety for both? :facepalm:[video=twitter;786760564181651456]https://twitter.com/KateKyriacou/status/786760564181651456[/video]
Safety for both? :facepalm:[video=twitter;786760564181651456]https://twitter.com/KateKyriacou/status/786760564181651456[/video]
[video=twitter;786763248628412416]https://twitter.com/KateKyriacou/status/786763248628412416[/video]
As for manslaughter, he failed to address why Warriena did not explore any other option before making the fatal decision to try to descend. The defence is going to ask why she didn't ask the witness who spoke to her for assistance and why she didn't simply remain put as by the Crown's own admission, there was no imminent threat to her at that point. As the defence has the benefit of addressing the jury last, the Crown cannot rebut any argument put forward by the defence and should have preempted this line of closing. They did not and I have no idea why they did not
.
Her decision wasn't rational because she had been drinking illegal home-made spirits, supplied by the accused.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.