tommy sherridan

Moderators: John, Sharon, Fossil, Lucky Poet, crusty_bint, Jazza, dazza

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Vinny the Mackem » Mon Nov 29, 2010 3:37 pm

Socceroo wrote:Will there be a clear cut verdict? Or will we after all these weeks see the Judge direct the Jury before they retire to reach a verdict?


There only has to be a majority. The judge will not direct the jury one way or the other - he will give them directions in terms of the law and may highlight certain parts of the evidence, but should not be influencing the jury one way or another; the facts are strictly a matter for the jury to decide.

Again, all that's ever needed is a simply majority, and that's either a conviction, with at least 8 for guilty, or an acquittal, with less than 8 for a guilty verdict.
User avatar
Vinny the Mackem
Second Stripe
Second Stripe
 
Posts: 399
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby pingu » Mon Nov 29, 2010 3:56 pm

do you think people could hate a paper that much for it to sway them in a jury?

simply NOT reading it would do most people
toot toot
User avatar
pingu
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:15 am

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby hungryjoe » Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:49 pm

pingu wrote:do you think people could hate a paper that much for it to sway them in a jury?

simply NOT reading it would do most people

This is the paper who (im)famously published the page one lead headline:
I SAW COUPLES INJECTING REEFERS

They have never changed and I suspect that most people with anything at all between their ears, would suspect them of anything.
Multi dinero, multi ficky fick, multi divorce.
User avatar
hungryjoe
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 1746
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:26 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby pingu » Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:10 pm

i never read it and know its full of bull but i dont know if i HATE it enough to free someone who i might feel is guilty tho, just because its against the sun/notw
toot toot
User avatar
pingu
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:15 am

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Socceroo » Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:42 pm

Vinny the Mackem wrote:
Socceroo wrote:Will there be a clear cut verdict? Or will we after all these weeks see the Judge direct the Jury before they retire to reach a verdict?


There only has to be a majority. The judge will not direct the jury one way or the other - he will give them directions in terms of the law and may highlight certain parts of the evidence, but should not be influencing the jury one way or another; the facts are strictly a matter for the jury to decide.

Again, all that's ever needed is a simply majority, and that's either a conviction, with at least 8 for guilty, or an acquittal, with less than 8 for a guilty verdict.


Aye that's what I meant direct...directions its all the same to me.
User avatar
Socceroo
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 1369
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 8:51 pm
Location: Mount Flo, Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby BrigitDoon » Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:52 pm

pingu wrote:do you think people could hate a paper that much for it to sway them in a jury?

Oh yes :)
UXB
BrigitDoon
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 4232
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:03 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Vinny the Mackem » Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:23 pm

Socceroo wrote:Aye that's what I meant direct...directions its all the same to me.

:D He he! Fairy nuff!! It's all pish anyway!
User avatar
Vinny the Mackem
Second Stripe
Second Stripe
 
Posts: 399
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby [The Joiner] » Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:50 am

Real life. http://confessionsofacalloutjoiner.blogspot.com/
[The Joiner]
Just settling in
Just settling in
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:11 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby pingu » Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:27 am

[The Joiner] wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvHskQHHbQ0&feature=youtube_gdata



my ears will never forgive you for that ubertripe :cry:
toot toot
User avatar
pingu
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:15 am

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby BrigitDoon » Thu Dec 09, 2010 7:24 pm

I see Mr Coulson has been in court and Mr Sherridan has been asking questions. Did Mr Sherridan ask any awkward questions about editorial policy at the News of the World? Wouldn't it be ironic if someone was forced to commit perjury in order to defend their position. :twisted:
UXB
BrigitDoon
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 4232
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:03 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby strange brew » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:55 pm

I'm no legal expert, but isn't debating the guilt of someone who is currently on trial considered contempt of court?
User avatar
strange brew
Busy bunny
Busy bunny
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby BrigitDoon » Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:55 am

Indeed. Mr Coulson is not on trial. Yet.
UXB
BrigitDoon
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 4232
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:03 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby north glasgow dave » Sat Dec 11, 2010 10:05 am

so if he gets a not guilty verdict.can and will he take legal action against the legal system which is trying him just now and if he does .and wins wont he be taking tax payers money....hmmm
north glasgow dave
Second Stripe
Second Stripe
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 4:24 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby Dexter St. Clair » Sat Dec 11, 2010 10:33 am

north glasgow dave wrote:so if he gets a not guilty verdict.can and will he take legal action against the legal system which is trying him just now and if he does .and wins wont he be taking tax payers money....hmmm



No.
"I before E, except after C" works in most cases but there are exceptions.
User avatar
Dexter St. Clair
Third Stripe
Third Stripe
 
Posts: 6252
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: tommy sherridan

Postby strange brew » Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:22 pm

BrigitDoon wrote:Indeed. Mr Coulson is not on trial. Yet.


I was talking about the basic premise of the whole topic, not just your post - I think I'd be quite legally sound if I said that Andy Coulson and all at the NotW are hateful pricks who prey on those who are too vulnerable and/or stupid to fight against them.
User avatar
strange brew
Busy bunny
Busy bunny
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: Glasgow

PreviousNext

Return to Random Distractions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests