| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? 18:22 - Sep 5 with 23148 views | Jackfath |
Not guilty for me. |  |
| |  |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:43 - Sep 11 with 3142 views | Belfast |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:35 - Sep 11 by neilrichards |
i know what your saying and i would want to also but in all honesty, what would it achieve?
She's a 17 year old girl, and girls who go around making these kind of false accusations generally don't have 2 penny's to rub together, Vicky Pollard springs to mind. |
Its not known if the allegation was false or not. What is the case is he was found not guilty. There is a clear difference. |  |
| You can always save face by cutting your fu cking head off. |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:45 - Sep 11 with 3141 views | Darran |
He should go after the CPS not the girl it was they that decided to take it back up even after they'd previously dropped it through lack of evidence. |  |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:47 - Sep 11 with 3138 views | Belfast |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 17:08 - Sep 10 by controversial_jack |
I don't understand how this even came to court. No evidence whatsoever, just her word against his. I hope he takes out a civil case against the police and CPS and takes them for whatever he can get |
When you say no evidence whatsoever, did you actually hear any of the evidence ?
From what i read, Michael Le Vel was a but lucky to walk, and it was only the girls account initially that was in question and didn't tally exactly with what evidence she gave in court when badgered by the defence.
There was evidence, the CPS stated the evidence passed their threshold test, so maybe Michael needs to quietly move on and count his lucky stars, wouldn't want a civil case taken out would he ? Lower balance of proof, like the Stephen Lawrence murderers.
Mikey should quietly move on methinks. | |
| You can always save face by cutting your fu cking head off. |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:49 - Sep 11 with 3134 views | Belfast |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:45 - Sep 11 by Darran |
He should go after the CPS not the girl it was they that decided to take it back up even after they'd previously dropped it through lack of evidence. |
He cant tho darran because they have a threshold test which the case passed, hence the reason why he was tried before his peers in a crown court.
As i said,he should breath a big sigh of relief, no smoke, fire etc ... Know what i mean ? | |
| You can always save face by cutting your fu cking head off. |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 16:12 - Sep 11 with 3121 views | WarwickHunt |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 23:24 - Sep 10 by Belfast |
The jury pickers as you put it would be the defence team, inc michael le vell. |
You've been watching too much telly.
The jury is chosen at random from a large pool of jurors currently on duty at that particular court. Barristers from either side can complain if they feel a juror is incapable of trying the case fairly.
This doesn't happen very often and the judge has the final say. |  | | |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 16:48 - Sep 11 with 3095 views | Belfast |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 16:12 - Sep 11 by WarwickHunt |
You've been watching too much telly.
The jury is chosen at random from a large pool of jurors currently on duty at that particular court. Barristers from either side can complain if they feel a juror is incapable of trying the case fairly.
This doesn't happen very often and the judge has the final say. |
Trust me, i have first hand knowledge of this in very recent times at crown court.
I objected to 46 jurors before i got the ones i wanted.
Watch too much telly ?
Dream on mucka, why get personal ?
We could have had a good old chat and gone round darran's house for tea. [Post edited 11 Sep 2013 17:07]
| |
| You can always save face by cutting your fu cking head off. |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 19:00 - Sep 11 with 3053 views | exiledclaseboy |
It's nonsense to suggest we should start prosecuting or suing accusers if a case fails in court. As someone pointed out above, how many genuine offenders would go unpunished in those circumstances because the victims would be scared to come forward? It seems the system worked in this case and Le Vell was found not guilty. Assuming he is, the system worked just as it should. |  |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 20:02 - Sep 11 with 3022 views | WarwickHunt |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 16:48 - Sep 11 by Belfast |
Trust me, i have first hand knowledge of this in very recent times at crown court.
I objected to 46 jurors before i got the ones i wanted.
Watch too much telly ?
Dream on mucka, why get personal ?
We could have had a good old chat and gone round darran's house for tea. [Post edited 11 Sep 2013 17:07]
|
So, you used a "challenge to the polls" for 46 out of 58 potential jurors and the judge was happy that you either had a prior connection to them or they had previously expressed bias or hostility towards you.
"Challenge for cause is very limited, because no questioning of jurors to establish a cause is normally allowed, and only the most obvious bias is likely to be detected."
Did they all have "Belfy Is Guilty" t-shirts on? Care to elaborate? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 21:11 - Sep 11 with 2996 views | Belfast |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 20:02 - Sep 11 by WarwickHunt |
So, you used a "challenge to the polls" for 46 out of 58 potential jurors and the judge was happy that you either had a prior connection to them or they had previously expressed bias or hostility towards you.
"Challenge for cause is very limited, because no questioning of jurors to establish a cause is normally allowed, and only the most obvious bias is likely to be detected."
Did they all have "Belfy Is Guilty" t-shirts on? Care to elaborate? |
We've all done things that we are not proud of, and I'm not hanging my washing out on here for the faceless cowards to drip over. I did my time, end of, and would do it again if i had to.
Standing on my head if needs be.
Honeslty nameless one, you want to see how the courts work in Ulster, drop me a PM.
If you ever need a decent defence team, give me a shout.
They saved me years. And it was 42 challenges, i do apologise, the trial was in northern Ireland, you work out the reasons why.
Anybody want to talk it through ?
Im in swansea on Monday. Again PM me.
Im not hiding, and never have.
Regards to you all.
[Post edited 11 Sep 2013 21:21]
| |
| You can always save face by cutting your fu cking head off. |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 23:05 - Sep 11 with 2949 views | WarwickHunt |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 21:11 - Sep 11 by Belfast |
We've all done things that we are not proud of, and I'm not hanging my washing out on here for the faceless cowards to drip over. I did my time, end of, and would do it again if i had to.
Standing on my head if needs be.
Honeslty nameless one, you want to see how the courts work in Ulster, drop me a PM.
If you ever need a decent defence team, give me a shout.
They saved me years. And it was 42 challenges, i do apologise, the trial was in northern Ireland, you work out the reasons why.
Anybody want to talk it through ?
Im in swansea on Monday. Again PM me.
Im not hiding, and never have.
Regards to you all.
[Post edited 11 Sep 2013 21:21]
|
Nameless one? You crack me up, Mr Belfast...
42 challenges eh? That's one great defence team right there...
England
By 1977, the number of peremptory challenges granted to each side was reduced from seven to three.
Northern Ireland
Unlike the rest of the United Kingdom, peremptory challenge survived in Northern Ireland into the twenty-first century. The Juries (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 entitled each party to a maximum of six peremptory challenges in civil cases. In criminal cases, each defendant was entitled to a maximum of twelve peremptory challenges; however, the prosecution could only allowed to challenge for cause. Northern Ireland was brought into line with England & Wales, and Scotland when peremptory challenge was finally abolished in 2007 (Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007, s.13) | | | |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 17:15 - Sep 12 with 2897 views | DafyddHuw |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 16:12 - Sep 11 by WarwickHunt |
You've been watching too much telly.
The jury is chosen at random from a large pool of jurors currently on duty at that particular court. Barristers from either side can complain if they feel a juror is incapable of trying the case fairly.
This doesn't happen very often and the judge has the final say. |
No - this isn't correct. Barristers don't have to give any reason for rejecting a potential juror, and the judge has no say. |  | | |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 17:42 - Sep 12 with 2887 views | WarwickHunt |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 17:15 - Sep 12 by DafyddHuw |
No - this isn't correct. Barristers don't have to give any reason for rejecting a potential juror, and the judge has no say. |
Oh yes they do, sunshine - peremptory challenge was abolished in the UK in 1988.
"To the array" is not an option now juries are randomly selected.
Which leaves - "challenge for cause" -
"involves challenging the right of an individual juror to sit on the jury. To be successful the challenge must point out a valid reason why the juror should not serve on the jury. An obvious reason would be that a juror is disqualified but a challenge for cause can also be made if the juror knows or is related to a witness or defendant."
The judge has final say. That's why he's called the judge... | | | |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 17:57 - Sep 12 with 2881 views | reddythered |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:47 - Sep 11 by Belfast |
When you say no evidence whatsoever, did you actually hear any of the evidence ?
From what i read, Michael Le Vel was a but lucky to walk, and it was only the girls account initially that was in question and didn't tally exactly with what evidence she gave in court when badgered by the defence.
There was evidence, the CPS stated the evidence passed their threshold test, so maybe Michael needs to quietly move on and count his lucky stars, wouldn't want a civil case taken out would he ? Lower balance of proof, like the Stephen Lawrence murderers.
Mikey should quietly move on methinks. |
Bit lucky, lol.
"Didn't tally exactly" is a tad deceitful of you. Vast swathes of her evidence didn't match up. As for the "CPS threshold test", the evidence of the girl didn't pass it until she magically went back to them and gave other alleged incidents which she'd forgotten to previously mention.
Let's be perfectly honest, post Saville ANY celeb mentioned is going to have CPS more minded to take the case forward. |  |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 10:26 - Sep 14 with 2819 views | perchrockjack |
Glad I missed out on this one. | |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 18:16 - Jan 6 with 2458 views | Jackfath |
Found out today the girl was his daughter and the claims were made from his ex wife who was very bitter about a divorce. | |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 01:04 - Apr 11 with 2080 views | Davillin |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 20:19 - Sep 5 by Catullus |
I don't know. I haven't heard all the evidence. In which case I will never know. I'll have to trust the judge and jury.
SO, whatever the result is, is what he is. |
The right attitude to have.
When I was in law school, I thought that the best protector of justice was our Supreme Court, followed by the appellate courts, followed by local courts, followed by attorneys, and with the jury at the very bottom.
After having practiced law for just a few years, I found that my list had flipped over completely, with the only hope being the jury.
Everything in the system except the jury is devoted in one way or another to keeping the whole truth from the jury. I believe with my entire being that if a jury can ever get all of the truth in a trial, they will not reach the wrong verdict. |  |
| |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 01:17 - Apr 11 with 2077 views | Davillin |
| Michael Le Vell - guilty or not guilty? on 15:49 - Sep 11 by Belfast |
He cant tho darran because they have a threshold test which the case passed, hence the reason why he was tried before his peers in a crown court.
As i said,he should breath a big sigh of relief, no smoke, fire etc ... Know what i mean ? |
I agree, with one additional thought.
He would be a fool to go into civil court where the defendant would both have a second shot at him, but would also have more leeway to present evidence that would be embarrassing to him at best, and damning at worst.
Old saw for attorneys: When you strike oil, stop drilling. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
