Good luck Hayne ,
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Earlier this morning, Jim Sarantinos was on SEN with Matt White. Here are the key highlights of the interview: * Mitchell Moses is an outside chance of returning before round nine, potentially for the R7 clash with the Tigers at Commbank pending…
Read more…Not Eels related, but as a Gold Coast resident, I am now buckled up and locked down for three or four days of what should be one hell of a ride. To all the members here on the Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast and Northern NSW, stay safe. Praying the…
Read more…One evening, the old farmer decided to take a walk to the pond, since it had been a while since he had been there. He took a large white bucket to collect some fruit on the long walk to the remote area.As he approached the pond, he heard voices…
Read more…
https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/nrl-2025-jason-ryles-press-conference-video-eels-vs-sharks-bailey-simonsson-controversial-penalty-magic-round/news-story/d6b58d85e121eef8e9fdad0dc8fed97a?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR7pKFnuALQkzyihCp34E…
Read more…We had 2 weeks to get ready for the sharks and the sharks had 4 days and we lostWelcome wooden spoon for 2025
Read more…We are getting better in a short amount of time, with a big roster turnover, a team full of youngsters and a massive amount of salary cap space available in 2026. Personally, I couldn't ask for more in his first season.*Side note, the game now due…
Read more…I'm stunned at the performance by this ref tonight game.
Read more…<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p> </p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>
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.
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.