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

Kramerica replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Parramatta, NRL to investigate images of rising Eels star
"xxoo :)"
2 hours ago
Jack replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"Pass "
3 hours ago
fake midget pseudoachondroplasia replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"You say 32yo isn't ancient but he would turn 34 only 1 month into his first season if we sign him for 2027. Also plenty here said Koloamatangi wasn't worth a 5 year risk despite a 5yr contract seeing him through to age of 33 or 34.
With the young…"
3 hours ago
fake midget pseudoachondroplasia replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"He was granted a release for his child illness so Newcastle would be favourites as that is where his family is closest.  But  they spent all their cap on Dylan Brown and Ponga..  Not sure the issue with Barnetts child but one would think Westmead…"
4 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"Moses SC asks the court: "Did Tripp make it up? Or who's telling the truth (Tripp or HQ)?"
Tripp, the Storm boss, made an implied threat towards the Eels saying the NRL could punish the Eels if it held firm on Lomax by issuing a salary cap sanction,…"
4 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"Will V'landy's will be asked to testify? He's already had his bird return once due to air-con challenges. Abdo? They could confirm it's all a misunderstanding, and they never had any intentions of doing what Storm said they were going to do."
5 hours ago
Clintorian replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"They should be shitting themselves, they thought they could just walk all over us and we wouldn't do anything about it, dodgy cunts."
5 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Iongi: Recent Illicit Substance Scandals vs NRL Sanctions
"Got any priors for players done for weed. I don't recall any.
Unlike weed, everything on that list is a class A. drug.
 "
6 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"Thanks Pato. It's 4o4. Does it say Tripp has not been asked to appear on the first? They can't make him but they can tear him up without reply if he doesn't attend
 "
6 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"Yeah Super, that's what I thought.
Pato was saying "unavailable to appear until 13th March. So Lomax won't be playing for Storm until Rd3 at the earliest if they get a result in their favour."
I thought he was saying it had been moved to 13th
 "
6 hours ago
ParraPride replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Iongi: Recent Illicit Substance Scandals vs NRL Sanctions
"He'll be fine it seems like an old picture."
6 hours ago
Eli Stephens replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Parramatta, NRL to investigate images of rising Eels star
"it's a year or 2 ago 🤣"
7 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Parramatta, NRL to investigate images of rising Eels star
"What the fuck is he actually doing in that Photo? I don't understand.
Did he splash it with bubble-bath?"
7 hours ago
LB replied to LB's discussion Eels interested in Barnett
"Lol media reporting Titans, Knights and Broncos and all close to home 😂"
7 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"This warms my cockles. I've said a few timess that we need to re-arrange their days for them. Make them do things that they have not planned and would rather not do. We have done this well with Ugly Pete and it's not going that great for him. Making…"
7 hours ago
Kurupt - Your Mums Favourite Thug replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Parramatta, NRL to investigate images of rising Eels star
"Fake news fake news, that's not even Iongi. I mean you can't tell it's him right?"
7 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: 2113

 

Eels interested in Barnett

Parramatta are interested in Mitch Barnett. Now at 33 in 2027 and coming off ACL, good idea? Having Paulo and De Belin being 34 and 36 respectively is it good to have that much age? Ryles wants a Paulo replacement that can lead the forwards, Barnett…

Read more…
18 Replies · Reply by Jack 3 hours ago
Views: 727

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