Replies

  • This is ridiculous, how many times does a man have to front up to court over this.

    I hope it's not chewing up tax payers money.

    • I doubt Hayne was ever on legal aid where the government pays an accused legal fees . Hayne would likely have paid out of his pocket as much as it cost to keep his new legal team going including senior counsels ( SC / QC 's ) for now three trials plus his  appeal to the Court of Appeal.  If he was on legal aid there is a chance the new trials would not have proceeded so as to reduce / eliminate future public legal aid bills for representing him .  

      • Driza, I don't understand how a man that's been found 'guilty' can have another trial to prove he's not guilty?

        • That mean's you don't understand the appeal system JB and why i repeatedly suspect your low intellect.

          • Yes Poppa I don't understand the system totally, I've never been in trouble with the law and neither has anyone close to me.

            I really don't understand how someone can have enough evidence stacked up against them to be convicted but then come back for a re-trial only to be proven not guilty.

            Sounds like a circus to me and a waste of taxpayers money.

            • Surely you have heard of "appeals" JB and again if you had half a brain you would know it was a hung jury the first time and close to it the second time...."enough evidence stacked up" is not relevant if not accepted for any number of reasons, e.g. a court found Cardinal Pell guilty and a team of high court judges dismissed all the charges.

              Maybe it less Bugs Bunny on TV for you JB and one or two of the thousand TV shows that cover the law......if you ever do get caught by the law JB a quick insanity plead should be enough for you along with extracts from IEE under your name.

            • An appeal can ony be granter when evidence is not allowed to be presented in the original trial or evidenve has been found that could impact the original decision.

          • John as you know , fortunately people are no longer burnt to the stake after mere suspicion of practising which craft . A person charged by police ( called the accused or defendant ) is entitled to procedural fairness both during the police investigation and as well during the court process. The procedural fairness owed to him /her during the court hearing ( in Haynes case the court hearing was one of trial by jury ) includes that the trial judge properly instructs the jury as to the lawful way the jury is to weigh up the evidence in determining the accused's guilt or innocence of the charge . In the first trial the jury were not able to arrive at the required majority decision to make a finding of guilty ( i.e. called " a hung jury"  ) in respect of Hayne . 

          In the second trial the required numbers in a different jury of 12 people found Hayne guilty . Hayne thought the second jury's decision was unfair so he used his legal right to appeal to a higher court . Hayne persuaded the court hearing his appeal to both set aside the finding of guilt by the jury as well as Haynes conviction by the court that had followed the jury's decision .(  The reason for the appeal courts decision was I think from memory that the trial judge incorrectly instructed the jury as to the way they should arrive at their decision (meaning Hayne was wrongly convicted and that is why he is entitled to a new trial ) . This requirement for @procedural fairness has been in our legal system since we first inherited from England when the first fleet arrived in 1788 . 

          • Witchcraft sorry not which craft . ( You know riding on a broomstick lol )

        • JB that is why our system is considered one of the most fairest in the land with built in corrections through the whole process.

          For the uninitiated and just for clarity in a nut shell

          1st Trial the jury couldnt agree on guilt 

          2nd Trial - At end of the end of the trial as the Judge explained legal principles to the new jury , These directions are provided to the jury by the judge at the end of a trial and provide guidance on how to apply the law, before they deliberated.  She made statements that were not true about the case. She used phrases that were meant to lead the jury into what they have to consider, her phrases were deemed extreme and had no basis in law. The result was the Jury were mislead by the judge in what they had to consider to find guilt, she basically changed the rules.

          Officailly the Appeal judges found that "Judge Syme's directions to the Jury were so Flawed that it neccesitated the appeal to be allowed" 

          Hope that helps. For the record if you were going away to Jail for an extended time wouldnt you at least want the process to be correct and beyond reproach.

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

Mallee57 replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"Whose going to do the main goal kicking this year? Moses, Pezet, Russell ? Or maybe another? Pezet is very good. Moses very good, Russell ok but struggles with kicks that are closer to the sidelines. "
5 hours ago
Nitram replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"Just no injuries please. I dont care if we lose. Means nothing if we rock up to Melbourne round 1 and get flogged.
Mitch should kick a few balls, make 1-2 tackles, pass the ball once or twice and then come off.
 "
6 hours ago
DYNASTY.LOADING replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"We will finish top 4"
6 hours ago
LB replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"But also when do they do it on their own? We cannot manipulate to make them great all the time for the sake of expansion. The idea is survival of the fittest."
6 hours ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"Great points Yehaz and fair ones too. 10+ wins is fair. If we get less Ryles has pressure."
7 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"and then remove the above response from activity....message received."
7 hours ago
Poupou Escobar replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"For context, last year we didn't drop Dylan Brown until it was mathematically impossible to make the eight. That was round 20 and he signed with the Knights before round 2."
8 hours ago
Yehez replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"I don't fully disagree. Getting 10 wins is not far from finals. Last few seasons 12/13 wins got you 8th. So really we should be able to add up to 5 wins this year IMO.
But if we don't and we stay at 10/11, but there are excuses, I'd accept it. As I…"
8 hours ago
Blue Eel replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"When do we consider that wonderful chant from last year. The future is now! Considing Russell is on the move at the end of this year.
Do we call it first few games, half way through the year, with 5 games to go. Do results or position on the ladder…"
9 hours ago
Mitchy replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"Mate I get it but it was a frustrating time watching him play and knowing he was on huge $$$; he either aims up and becomes 'elite' or he filters off like a few have over time."
9 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"V'landys said the "whole point of Vegas" was to promote the Watch NRL overseas app. He then went onto plans for their 300K UK viewers (around $70m AUD pa). Then, there's broadcasting, wagering and other sponsors and stakeholders. He sees dollar…"
9 hours ago
Blue Eel replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"I'm going against the grain a bit here.
This is now Ryles's team except for Matterson. (obviously trying to get rid of him). This team has been put together and the recruitment guys have tried their best to get players. Wheather they succeeded is…"
9 hours ago
Yehez replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"There are expectations, but teams fail them every year. 
 
As far as I am concerned for our sake, my redline is we don't regress. 
In simple terms, if we get 10 wins again and players keep improving, I am fine. Not necessarily delighted, but…"
9 hours ago
Archie replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"Shit Carlo.... .yes he does! ... now i just can't unsee that. "
9 hours ago
Poppa replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"Lol.....just checking you were on your toes and not just leading that "horse eel" around.
PS there was a lot of catholic priests at that inquisition.....past loves?/ lives?"
10 hours ago
Adam Magrath replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"I was saying this very thing to a mate of mine (who is a QLDER) who was having a whinge about the new origin rules. V'Landy's sole objective is revenue, if it makes money it's happening and origin will make more with the best players in it…"
11 hours ago
More…

Keaon done deal

As of Thursday, December 11, 2025, South Sydney Rabbitohs forwardKeaon Koloamatangi has reportedly agreed to a deal with the Parramatta Eels, but it is not yet officially announced by the clubs.  Soon to be announced.

Read more…
14 Replies · Reply by Poppa Jan 9
Views: 2087

 

V'Landys on Hello Sport

Happy Monday, if anyone wants a good laugh to start their week, skip to 32:50 mark and listen to this f***wit talk. It is laughable seriously. Claiming the offer of $300k was a great deal and we can put that into our junior system. But said we can…

Read more…
79 Replies · Reply by LB 6 hours ago
Views: 2459

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>