Court case involving Albion players - the (new) only thread allowed - ALL found NOT GUILTY

[Dr NBC]

Maybe it's because she didn't remember who her alleged assaulters were until January (just after she'd split up with an un-named albion player).

The alleged victim also accused another player of being involved in the "attack" though that individual was subsequently ruled out of police investigation. Sort of makes one wonder what the alleged victim actually remembers from that night.

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

Indeed. The national press seem to have passed this by in favour of poogate. Guess with all the material our club is providing at the moment they were caught between two stools..................

Guess they had to "dump" one case?

 

[Kumquat]

Guess they had to "dump" one case?

They were well into the first trial though. Maybe they just forgot to keep a log on when the retrial was.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Indeed. The national press seem to have passed this by in favour of poogate. Guess with all the material our club is providing at the moment they were caught between two stools..................

Sadly they haven't - on the day of the suspensions the Albion were on the BBC News front page TWICE !

 

[Kumquat]

Sadly they haven't - on the day of the suspensions the Albion were on the BBC News front page TWICE !

I'm sure you're right but wouldn't like that to get in the way of a.. erm.. *cough*.. "shit" joke....

 

[Krusty]

Judge Moss summing up George Barker's evidence: "Everybody was drunk and found it funny. It was hilarious at the time but it's not so funny now.

 

[Krusty]

Judge Moss, summing up Rodgers' evidence after handling the victim's phone: "She was changed and started going on about the photos. It was weird, I thought she was aware of what had happened.

"She was going on about the photos, telling me to delete them."

 

[Krusty]

Judge Moss summing up Lewis Dunk's evidence: "I have never seen (the victim) since that night and have never seen any video or photographs from that night."

 

[Triggaaar]

The alleged victim also accused another player of being involved in the "attack" though that individual was subsequently ruled out of police investigation. Sort of makes one wonder what the alleged victim actually remembers from that night.

Her testimony was that she didn't remember anything after leaving the pub. Although I believe she did say that she remembered not kissing the defendants. And she remembered what she was wearing when she went to sleep.

Did she accuse someone other than the 4 on trial? I know Tommy Elphick had been questioned, but that was a case of mistaken identity - was there someone else too?

 

[Krusty]

Judge Moss summing up Leon Redwood's evidence: "I thought it was funny to spray foam on her. I put letters on her thigh.
"There was no reason for it - it was just funny."

Judge Moss summing up Leon Redwood's evidence: "She accused the boys of doing things - I didn't believe her."

Judge Moss summarising Professor Nicholas Birch's expert evidence: "The most likely explanation for the victim's behaviour and failure of memory is a very substantial dose of alcohol."

 

[Postman Pat]

Did she accuse someone other than the 4 on trial? I know Tommy Elphick had been questioned, but that was a case of mistaken identity - was there someone else too?

If I remember rightly at the time she couldn't distinguish between Lewis and Tommy so both were taken in for questioning. As Tommy was on crutches after injury at the time, and the alleged attacker wasn't, he was subsequently (and correctly) released without charge, as it would have been obvious that it was him.

 

[Krusty]

Judge Moss has now completed his summary amd the jury have been sent out to consider their verdict.

The judge instructed them to attempt to reach a unanimous verdict and put any talk of a majority verdict out of their mind.

 

[nwgull]

Court case involving Albion players - the (new) only thread allowed

Was a reason ever given, or suggested, by the prosecution or defence as to why she was wearing 5 pairs of knickers on a night out in the middle of summer?

 

[Triggaaar]

If I remember rightly at the time she couldn't distinguish between Lewis and Tommy so both were taken in for questioning. As Tommy was on crutches after injury at the time, and the alleged attacker wasn't, he was subsequently (and correctly) released without charge, as it would have been obvious that it was him.

That's what I thought, just checking there wasn't another.

A couple more days and this should be over.

 

[Oscar]

Please lets have a jury make a decision this time.

If they don't, surely this will all be thrown out as a complete waste of time and money.

 

[Dominoid]

Court case involving Albion players - the (new) only thread allowed

What would happen should a second jury be unable to reach a substantial verdict? Would that result in a second retrial or is there a line drawn at which a case would be dismissed for having insufficient evidence either way to reach a verdict?

 

[Postman Pat]

What would happen should a second jury be unable to reach a substantial verdict? Would that result in a second retrial or is there a line drawn at which a case would be dismissed for having insufficient evidence either way to reach a verdict?

http://ukcrime.wordpress.com/2013/02/20/what-happens-if-juries-cant-agree/

What if the jury at a re-trial can’t agree – can they keep on re-trying the defendant forever?

This is obviously fairly unlikely, but it does happen. There is a convention that the Prosecution get two goes and then that’s it. If they can’t persuade two juries that a defendant is guilty, then they offer no evidence (as set out above).

This is not a fixed rule of law – Parliament has not set out in an Act of Parliament that this is the case. For that reason, there is no absolute bar on the CPS having a third go.

One example of this is the case of Bell [2010] EWCA Crim 3. The Court did note (para 46) that “We doubt the value of offering further guidance on the circumstances in which a second re-trial may be appropriate. We shall confine ourselves to reminding the Crown that the jurisdiction which permits a second re-trial after two jury disagreements in circumstances like the present must be exercised with extreme caution. The broad public interest in the administration of criminal justice leads us to the clear view that a second re-trial should be confined to the very small number of cases in which the jury is being invited to address a crime of extreme gravity which has undoubtedly occurred (as here) and in which the evidence that the defendant committed the crime (again, as here), on any fair minded objective judgment remains very powerful.“

In practice, the most important factor would be the seriousness of the case – on a charge of murder it is very likely that there will be a re-trial, if the matter is a minor one (such as shoplifting), then they leave it at that and ‘offer no evidence’ meaning that the defendant is acquitted on the direction of the Judge (known as a Not Guilty verdict under s17 after s17 Criminal Justice Act 1967). This has the same effect as, and is as ‘good’ as, a verdict of Not Guilty from a jury.

 

[Hillian1]

What would happen should a second jury be unable to reach a substantial verdict? Would that result in a second retrial or is there a line drawn at which a case would be dismissed for having insufficient evidence either way to reach a verdict?

I was on a Jury that couldn't come to a decision, it was only after we told the judge that we were told, then a bizarre thing happened. The Judge asked the defence Barrister if he wanted a re-trial as the crown cannot bring the same case 3 times. Unsurprisingly he said no.

The judge told the defendant he was free to go.

 

[Krusty]

Judge Moss has indicated that the jury will have until 4pm to deliberate and will then be called back to the courtroom. It is not expected that they will have reached a decision by then.

 

[Triggaaar]

I was on a Jury that couldn't come to a decision, it was only after we told the judge that we were told, then a bizarre thing happened. The Judge asked the defence Barrister if he wanted a re-trial as the crown cannot bring the same case 3 times. Unsurprisingly he said no.

The judge told the defendant he was free to go.

Yeah yeah yeah, interesting story, but... did you think he was guilty?