Coulson & Brooks hacking trial starts today
Discussion
Fittster said:
Mermaid said:
Chimune said:
Hope we see lots of people getting even with these stories.
Brooks got along with Blair - here's hoping there is a story behind the evil eyes & her.We now understand what she means by working together.
Wombat3 said:
They are so screwed. Better that they just cop a guilty plea & get it over with surely?
Some of the group have already pleaded guilty and one would assume that they received a lower penalty. There is quite a substantial reduction available for an early plea.There is, of course, a variety of reasons why some people do not avail themselves of this bonus even when there is a lot of evidence against them. It might be simply that a finding of guilt will hurt them more than any likely penalty. Sometimes they feel that even if there is just a chance of a NG, and there almost always is, it is worth going for. Some are advised by their brief to go for it and they accept this.
Most lie in the early stages of an investigation and this includes their loved ones. When they are confronted by the evidence against them they feel they don't want to let them down by admitting it, or perhaps they are just too stupid to realise what they are doing.
Sometimes the defendants have a certain conceit. They are out of their comfort zone but are reluctant to accept advice. These are often the ones who have been very successful in their chosen career at an early age. They've always been in control, making the big decisions, and are reluctant to accept advice. These often dump their defence 'team', pre-trial normally but sometimes, for a bit of added excitement, during the trial.
Every now an again the defence team will come up with an ambush, something off the wall, a surprise witness, or at least the content of their evidence.
Some defence teams think that they can destroy the credibility of a witness, at least in the eyes of the jury. If the case has a number of witnesses who have never been to court before this is more frequent. A high profile trial puts real pressure on every witness. (I used to occasionally be sick before I went into court, oddly enough more frequently when I was confident of my evidence. I think this was due to the fear of letting down others who've worked on the case.)
In these cases the defence will make a decision as to plea during the trial, often after the prosecution case.
I think I remember reading that Brookes dismissed her defence team a few weeks before the start of the trial. Was this because she did not want to follow their advice and there was a mutual agreement?
Every now and again, someone will go for a trial purely for their time in court.
Derek Smith said:
There is quite a substantial reduction available for an early plea.
There is, of course, a variety of reasons why some people do not avail themselves of this bonus even when there is a lot of evidence against them...................
......and of course in some cases they might actually be innocent.There is, of course, a variety of reasons why some people do not avail themselves of this bonus even when there is a lot of evidence against them...................
I agree with a lot of what Derek has said immediately above re arrogance etc. My only frist hand experience was so similar to what is in that post it is scary. The lying to55er was arrogant beyond belief. He also changed his QC between losing the trial and the Appeals - 3 visits to RCJ; not much fun!
Thank God I engaged a heavy weight QC for peace of mind myself as he ripped the to55er a new one under cross. Even the Judge picked the to55er up during his own evidence asking him to answer the questions put to him rather than obfuscate etc.
Arrogance before a fall?
In the Hacking trial, I actually am looking forward to the defence - if we ever get to see it - as they will have seen all of these emails and evidence in advance so presumably, think that they will be able to rip it apart or defend them. At this stage and with the amount of prep that will have been done, I cannot imagine there will be any surprise witnesses or evidence etc.
Just cannot see how, armed with an email to the effect, a denial of knowledge can even be attempted? (Although when an email was shown to my to55er at trial - it was dug out of a file from his own lawyers which completely contradicted his sworn evidence - the to55er simply said: "I have no recollection of that" and tried to suggest that it may NOT be an email from him to his own lawyers. Arrogant to55er!)
People do seem to have forgotten that we have only be seeing/hearing opening arguments so far though? No actual evidence that can be examined under cross!
Thank God I engaged a heavy weight QC for peace of mind myself as he ripped the to55er a new one under cross. Even the Judge picked the to55er up during his own evidence asking him to answer the questions put to him rather than obfuscate etc.
Arrogance before a fall?
In the Hacking trial, I actually am looking forward to the defence - if we ever get to see it - as they will have seen all of these emails and evidence in advance so presumably, think that they will be able to rip it apart or defend them. At this stage and with the amount of prep that will have been done, I cannot imagine there will be any surprise witnesses or evidence etc.
Just cannot see how, armed with an email to the effect, a denial of knowledge can even be attempted? (Although when an email was shown to my to55er at trial - it was dug out of a file from his own lawyers which completely contradicted his sworn evidence - the to55er simply said: "I have no recollection of that" and tried to suggest that it may NOT be an email from him to his own lawyers. Arrogant to55er!)
People do seem to have forgotten that we have only be seeing/hearing opening arguments so far though? No actual evidence that can be examined under cross!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff