Michael le Vell (Kevin Webster)

[tidyman]

They once, many moons ago, asked or rather insisted that I sat on a jury.

To paraphrase Karl Marx. Or some **** like that.

Any judicial system that wants me to be part of it, is one fucked up carry on.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

Agreed. Nothing will change my opinion of him.... Those Eyes..... Guilty

Not just a 'haunted' look , from all the months of worry and stress???

A guilty man if ever I saw one.

I reckon he has a child in either pocket....

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

Dirty dirty rat

Seriously, have a word with yourself.
You haven't heard a single word of evidence from this case, and know less than nothing, yet you have convicted him already.
If he's found guilty, then lock him up and lose the key, but try letting the judge and jury work it out first, because unlike you and the other Miss Marples on here they will actually get to hear the evidence, and will make an informed decision.

 

[2sheikhs]

If this is an isolated case, I can't see how a conviction could be secured as it's one word against another. There must be some kind of corroboration or witness account otherwise the CPS wouldn't even entertain charges.

 

[CTID1988]

Jury's are daft. Surely a judge with years of experience is more than able to make a judgement? Or instead of a jury get a load of judges. Something doesn't sit right about a load of corrie fans say there thinking they are looking at Kevin Webster

 

[foxy]

Jury's are daft. Surely a judge with years of experience is more than able to make a judgement? Or instead of a jury get a load of judges. Something doesn't sit right about a load of corrie fans say there thinking they are looking at Kevin Webster

What like the one who sentenced Stuart Hall?

Or even this muppet...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/judge-calls-victim-13-a-sexual-predator-outcry-as-41yearold-man-walks-free-after-admitting-sex-with-girl-8748494.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 48494.html</a>

:)

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

He should get at least six months for that suit and draped scarf ensemble.

 

[bennyblue]

One persons word against another, the cps must believe they have a strong chance of conviction for it to have got to trial.
If he is found not guilty the accuser must have some serious issues and hatred towards him to have made it up, nor could i understand what would be to gain from making it up either, although that doesnt make him guilty though.









Beast.

 

[blueonblue]

First off I personally plain dont like the c*nt, not least because he`s a ragarse, BUT, and its a big but that could effect you one day, he is innocent until he has had a FAIR trial and been found guilty.

What is happening here is trial by media, I doubt there is anyone in the f*cking country who has not seen the shite in the press, so what chance of an unbiased jury ?, an make no mistake, the press go for sensational over truth every time because it sells their product, there needs to be a complete media ban on any stories until the trial is over in all cases.

Not just the accused gets damaged, even the alleged victim is at the mercy of how the reporter slants the story, in this case the guys career is almost certainly over no matter what the jury decides, while she will always have people who doubt what she says just because they think "Kevin" could never do things like that so she`s lying.

Nor can we trust the CPS to make any kind of sensible decision, as has been proven over the last few years with some truly plain stupid cases getting as far as trial before being kicked out as utter nonsense with little or no evidence.

 

[tidyman]

Jury's are daft. Surely a judge with years of experience is more than able to make a judgement? Or instead of a jury get a load of judges. Something doesn't sit right about a load of corrie fans say there thinking they are looking at Kevin Webster

If you listen carefully to a judges summing up of a case. And in particular his final instructions to the jury, they often make it very clear what there view of the situation is and subtely advise the jury on the aspects of the trial he thinks they should be concentrating on.

They have to be careful though. I know of one case about ten years ago where a conviction was thrown out because the appeal court ruled the original judge over influenced the jury in his summing up.

Of course the jury can choose to ignore everything he says but the judge will normally give a good indication of what his thoughts on the trial are.