Cucking Funt
Member
- Location
- Gaza
- Country
England
I don't know but, then again, neither do you.
Russell Brand
- Topic starter Cucking Funt
- Start date
Part Time James
Member
- Country
-
England
What's it stand for? Did Not Ask?
Stirlingsays
Member
- Country
-
England
Errrr....And where do you get that from?
You are talking about last century matey.
From Grok:
Yes, in England and Wales, juries can and have convicted defendants where the case rested solely or decisively on hearsay evidence.
Legal
Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (particularly sections 114–126), hearsay evidence is admissible in criminal trials if it meets one of the statutory gateways (e.g. the witness is dead, too ill, or too frightened to attend, or it is in the interests of justice).There is no absolute rule that a conviction based solely or decisively on hearsay is unfair or unlawful. This was confirmed by the UK Supreme Court in R v Horncastle [2009] UKSC 14 / [2010] 2 AC 373. The Court held that the safeguards in the 2003 Act (including the judge’s power under s.125 to stop a case if the hearsay is so unconvincing that a conviction would be unsafe, plus directions to the jury and the ability to challenge the maker’s credibility) are sufficient to ensure a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The European Court of Human Rights later accepted this approach in Al-Khawaja and Tahery v United Kingdom (2011).
steeleye20
Member
- Location
- Croydon
- Country
-
England
I'd hate to have a defence barrister like that acting for me.
He did more for the prosecution case than for Brand.
The C4 documentary prejudiced the trial imo, it could not then be a level playing field, they had found him guilty this should not have been admissable.
The court is a theatre to me, and of course everybody is lying, so where you have little or no evidence apart from what people say, it's bound to be unsatisfactory.
😎
He did more for the prosecution case than for Brand.
The C4 documentary prejudiced the trial imo, it could not then be a level playing field, they had found him guilty this should not have been admissable.
The court is a theatre to me, and of course everybody is lying, so where you have little or no evidence apart from what people say, it's bound to be unsatisfactory.
😎
Stirlingsays
Member
- Country
-
England
Yeah you are.
You on the other hand support policies that allowed the immigration that raped tens of thousands of mostly working class vulnerable white girls.
Oh and some murders and arrests of fathers trying to defend their girls as well.
I never supported that immigration, you supported the left who did.
You have no position to moralise.
Perhaps, one day someone will accuse you on hearsay and considering your attitude you have no right to anyone defending you.
CPFCSaturn
Member
- Country
-
England
I would call it unbelievable, but it’s not.
So just to clarify, you’re on the rapist’s side?
They don’t care about the victims. Just the perpetrator.
This is a disgraceful post.
cryrst
Member
- Location
- The garden of England
- Country
-
England
And he’s one of yours 🤣🤣🤣
No one that far left is one of mine!