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

LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Just a side note, Dom Ferrugia signed with Easts."
11 minutes ago
Hell On Eels replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Stefano is an emerging talent. He admitted he moved on from us because his path was blocked as BA had Junior & RCG. *
Players do move on if they feel their path is blocked or going nowhere. Cody Black. Pezet. Our ex-Sanders. Roosters' ex-Sanders. …"
12 minutes ago
Hell On Eels replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Coryn, Not really. The 22' GF was wallpapering over deep cracks. Our attitude & defence in the previous era was vulnerable. Jeckyl-Hyde. Especially out wide. And in free-fall post-2020. 
You think Matt Cameron-Ivan Cleary wanted to get rid of Luai…"
21 minutes ago
Frank The Tank replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Which talent that was blocked and have moved on to another club and become a star??"
25 minutes ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Thing here is and it doesn't even matter that Pezet didn't want long term or JR didn't offer it.Thing here is whomever it is young pathway guy or open market guy they have to be upto speed Moses isn't getting any younger and if we continue burning…"
48 minutes ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"BA wanted him long term, i reckon Ryles would have too for the right price."
50 minutes ago
Hell On Eels replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Gents, which is true: we want/wanted Lomax long-term or we didn't/ don't? And, is it a conspiracy or a lie?
And one more: If your 13 partners before your wife didn't work out, is your wife your 14th choice off the bench? "
1 hour ago
Hell On Eels replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"I think getting Cody Black was astute. Competition. Depth. Raise average footy IQ. Both hungry for FG. Let's see which one rises to the throne long-term: Sanders or Black? "
1 hour ago
Eelawarra’s discussion was featured
Fantastic idea, congrats to everyone involved.https://www.facebook.com/reel/864145993036047/?fs=e&s=TIeQ9V&am...
1 hour ago
SuperEel 22 replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"I don't think Sticky has ever developed a halfback. Sanders seemed to have a solid NSW Cup season. 19 games, 6 tries, 15 try assists. 88% tackle efficiency, 52avg run metres, 153 avg kick metres."
1 hour ago
fake midget pseudoachondroplasia replied to Eelawarra's discussion THE EELS SUPERTEE
"This is how you build business relationships in the community with positive PR.  Sure attending hospitals, schools and attending charity days giving away free training gear and footies is great but this is something beyond that and means a lot to…"
1 hour ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"He is also doing what is best for his client and he is mates with Ryles too. A lot of backlash over the deal, he is coming in saying this was the plan all along with no thought of long term where i am saying there definately was an interest long…"
1 hour ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Well why say yes to the question we wanted him long term?"
1 hour ago
Tin Tim replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"It was explained at the time, but some here still had their own thoughts & like most of the time the people here were wrong. "
1 hour ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐 replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Mate, im just asking you which one is correct?  Your the one that said the second version is incorrect as Anasta is  protecting the Eels 
Prove it LB"
1 hour ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐 replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Others are putting more trust in the other version.  
When i posted this blog I didn't see both versions.   Im just saying both can't be correct,  and how would anyone prove which one is. 
So you're saying the second version is bs - prove it.
What…"
1 hour ago
More…

 

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