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

Joel K replied to LB's discussion Izack Tago dropped to bench for Penrith
"ivan variety"
2 minutes ago
Flow Basket replied to Desieels's discussion One game only, same old story. 40 years of this rubbish (spoiler alert REALLY REALLY LONG POST)
"I will raise u .
The ref's 
Russell gone . "
55 minutes ago
Eli Stephens replied to Eli Stephens's discussion 6 moreeee
"Agreed, prefer just a full blown whistle and explanation as to why it's called. Not just the official saying 6 more and no one knowing what's going on. "
57 minutes ago
Francis Nelson replied to Eli Stephens's discussion 6 moreeee
"The six again rule should just be taken out of the game, It has been controversial, frustrating and  has not improved the game at all. No one in the viewing audience has no idea whats going on
 "
1 hour ago
shane replied to EA's discussion Your Line up for next week?
"1 Iongi
2 Simmo
3 Pensini
4 Russell
5 Kelly
6 Papalii
7 Moses
8 Moretti
9 Smith
10 Paulo
11 Williams
12 Kautoga
13 Walker
14 Tuivita
15 Guymer
16 Tuilagi
17 Samrani
18 De Belin
19 Da Silva"
1 hour ago
Bubba j replied to EA's discussion Your Line up for next week?
"Guymer has to be 13 he doesn't miss a tackle and Moretti on the bench plus Samani to the wing Russell to centre "
1 hour ago
Coryn Hughes replied to EA's discussion Take Aways from the game
1 hour ago
The Badger replied to Desieels's discussion One game only, same old story. 40 years of this rubbish (spoiler alert REALLY REALLY LONG POST)
"Where is your never ending, long winded commentary about how right you are and everyone else who thinks differently to you is a non contributor getting anyone? 
Whilst I use terms you may not use (look up the board bios) you assume things I never…"
1 hour ago
The Captain commented on charlie cauchi’s status
"Teams have to opt-in to be considered for Vegas. So yes, we can choose not to opt-in."
1 hour ago
TolEllts replied to Eli Stephens's discussion 6 moreeee
"It gives the refs to chnage the momentum of the game and put on fatigue to a team that they don"t like say . . . Parra.
With the way the Hopgood charge been made, it just shows the corruption and unfairness to other teams."
1 hour ago
LB replied to EA's discussion Your Line up for next week?
"Only thing is you don't want to bring those kids up to early, both need defensive work. Pezet at least can be placeholder for a few wins. Yoh can win games with Pezet."
2 hours ago
LB replied to EA's discussion Your Line up for next week?
"Few things.
I would not be surprised to see no changes other than Hopgood of course.
Samrani for Kelly I think is most likely if there is one.
Ryles will not drop Pezet anytime soon, but come round 10 or so if Twidle and or Lorenzo continue to…"
2 hours ago
Angry Eel replied to Eli Stephens's discussion 6 moreeee
"When you lose by 50, you can't blame the refs for losing. However the refereeing was diabolical and should still be scrutinised. Chris Butler in particular needs to be held to account for his performance. 1st of all the knock on call that we…"
2 hours ago
John Boyle replied to EA's discussion Your Line up for next week?
"We waste 2 interchanges on the Smith and Da Silva rotation, thats a waste if you ask me."
2 hours ago
Priceforever replied to EA's discussion Your Line up for next week?
"Samrani to wing. I agree having Riley Smith and replacing him with TDS doesn't seem to help things. I'm also a little worried with the Moses/ Pezet combination. Both are good and dominent 7s but there seemed to be some confusion who was running the…"
2 hours ago
Priceforever replied to Eli Stephens's discussion 6 moreeee
"Never been a fan of the six again rule . It can totally change the momentum and outcomes of games. We copped a heap early on Thursday night and our forwards certainly seemed puffed. Althought that wasn't the reason we lost the game it certainly…"
2 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: 2167

 

1eE Modern day Eels team: Second-row

PJ Marsh has come out of nowhere to secure the starting Hooking role for this side. With a 3 way tie for 2nd between Drew, Mahoney and Riddell.Now onto the back-row, one of them is a for gone conclusion so i am better off just putting him in now,…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 128

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