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

Poppa replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"Hopefully they will pay for that after the event Randy, ARL needs to get involved once the court room drama is finished. An ounce of brains means that they should stop the court process and just revert back to the process as if Parra wins it. It…"
10 minutes ago
Poppa replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"Well I summarised it like I did to simpfly the process as to where it is at, all the issues surrounding Storm and the NRL are supplementary at this stage given the brief.
Answering your specific question if the court rules to abide by the contract…"
14 minutes ago
Bear replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"Just read an article ( fox sports, I think) stating how Parra and Ryles are now under pressure and this year will be a confirmation or failure basically.  What a load of bullshit we are a young side finding our feet and identity and while I believe…"
52 minutes ago
Coryn Hughes replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"Urgent athletes is what we need and both those guys fit the description on the edge."
6 hours ago
Prof. Daz replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"HOE, you're right to point to a court write down as being capable of permitting a spin where V'Landys claims he was the sensible one. 
However - and lawyers please step in to clarify - I believe a write down is not a writing. That is, a write down…"
10 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"I think they can still point the "blowtorch" at us but it won't be lit. Melb threatened NRL cap sanctions if we didn't play nice. That shit is off the table. They can suggest, encourage, incentivise and state their unhappiness toward us, but they…"
10 hours ago
Angry Eel replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"There's 2 players I just love, nothing special about them but good things just seem to happen around them because they always compete. Samrani and Guymer. I know it's hard to find a spot for them but gees I'd love it if we could "
11 hours ago
Clintorian replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Teancum Brown pushing his case for R1
"He will be too good for Cup by the end of the season."
11 hours ago
Michael W. replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"I just think because Williams can play middle, he could possibly be able to play right edge. Watching Kautoga, he is a natural left edge."
12 hours ago
Yehez replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"Our strongest team. 
Regarding Moretti, we just have so much forward depth, especially at this level of quality (Good players with some potential yet getting to their prime). I mean guys like Kelma, Doorey, Moretti, Mataele, Latu, Kautoga all in the…"
12 hours ago
LB replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"But to say that the amount of money is a good deal is the worst part. He could have said Melbourne made an offer and Parra didn't agree, that is all it is right now, let both of them sort it out."
12 hours ago
LB replied to LB's discussion V'Landys on Hello Sport
"Though i wonder Poppa, i am generally asking as law is not my strong suit, if the court uphold it and Parra win the case that means the NRL can then be involved again since it is out of court. Will they abide by that too or can they still favour…"
12 hours ago
Parra fan on The Hill replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"True. Rusty had a stellar second half of 2025. Played his best footy and showed smarts.
 "
12 hours ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"Great pick up."
13 hours ago
TolEllts replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Trial #2 / Pre Season Challenge Week 3 Team List v Sydney Roosters
"LB, I think because the NSW Cup is going to be played at Henson Park."
13 hours ago
TolEllts replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"I reckon Parra should start having some journos under their care😉"
13 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: 2081

 

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…
45 Replies · Reply by Poppa 10 minutes ago
Views: 1992

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