Social Blogs

Replies

• 

  John Boyle March 5, 2023 at 8:43pm

  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.
  • 

    Driza > John Boyle March 6, 2023 at 8:08am

    

    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 .  
    • 

      John Boyle > Driza March 6, 2023 at 8:22am

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

        Poppa > John Boyle March 6, 2023 at 11:22am

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

          John Boyle > Poppa March 6, 2023 at 12:42pm

          

          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.
          • 

            Poppa > John Boyle March 6, 2023 at 1:50pm

            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.
          • 

            don robinson > John Boyle March 13, 2023 at 1:30pm

            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.
      • 

        Driza > John Boyle March 6, 2023 at 2:16pm

        

        • 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 . 
        • 

          Driza > Driza March 6, 2023 at 2:53pm

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

        Blue Eel > John Boyle March 9, 2023 at 10:42am

        

        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.