Footsoldier
Banned
- May 26, 2013
- 2,904
Will this be the shortest deliberation in British history?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Updated: Lee Rigby's Murderers Sentenced
- Thread starter Footsoldier
- Start date
BensGrandad
New member
Why bother to retire he has admitted doing it so walk out say guilty and back in not even time for a cuppa.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
Why even have a trial ?
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,645
Because they've pleaded not guilty.
albion534
Well-known member
im sure they could discuss it at the bench and have a verdict before anyones back from their toilet break
Hillian1
( . ) ( . )
There will be one on the Jury who will question it, there always is.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,274
BensGrandad
New member
I accept what you say and my remark was rather tongue in cheek but unless I have read it wrong one of them has admitted that he did it and it was premeditated so no question of murder or not I wouldnt have thought, but then I am not a legal eagle just an ordinary man in the street.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
Oh Uncle, do you have to do this...
Do what ? Can you imagine what would happen if they got off or got less than 40 years ? To me the trial is an utter waste of time and money other than to decide the sentance.
Hillian1
( . ) ( . )
So what would you have done Uncle?
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,645
So, it's not a waste of time & money then.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
Procedures have to be followed but there is nothing to " trial "
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,645
Due to the fact that both pleaded not guilty, yes there is.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
I am out of this thread as it will only end in tears. Carry on.
Isn't that the job of the jury? To question the evidence.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,645
Hillian1
( . ) ( . )
Indeed it is, but I'm not sure there can be any evidence to exonerate them in this.
Edit: Actually it's not. Their duty is to listen to the evidence put forward and base their verdict on it, not question it.
BensGrandad
New member
I dont know the answer but I am sure somebody does; can the judge from the outset say he will accept a majority verdict or does he only do that if they cannot reach a unanimous decision.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,274
It is justice I'm afraid, it may be not the justice you want but it is better than the justice you get in North Korea or Syria or Iran or even Guantanamo Bay. They are guilty and they will do their time but they have had their time in open court and will be sentenced appropriately. It's what we do.
What have I said? Explain.
To clarify my post, I didn't mean to literally question the evidence in court.