Michael le Vell (Kevin Webster)

[allan harper]

Layers?

 

[bernabias home shirt]

It'll be interesting to see how it goes. Purely a guess based on his reactions, I would say he's guilty, but then again i've not heard or seen her reactions as she's behind a curtain, so to speak.

The think is though you can't guess when the rest of someone's life is at stake. Like I said earlier I have no idea if he is guilty or not. If I were sat on that jury I would have to be pretty certain to send a man down for x years.

I agree. And if its just his word against hers then I can't see how a conviction could be considered safe?

Like 2sheikhs said earlier why would the cps take the case on
If this is based on one persons word against the other.

 

[mackenzie]

The think is though you can't guess when the rest of someone's life is at stake. Like I said earlier I have no idea if he is guilty or not. If I were sat on that jury I would have to be pretty certain to send a man down for x years.

I agree. And if its just his word against hers then I can't see how a conviction could be considered safe?

Like 2sheikhs said earlier why would the cps take the case on
If this is based on one persons word against the other.

That has always made me wonder. Surely they must have more than just what we are hearing at the moment?

 

[worsleyweb]

I agree. And if its just his word against hers then I can't see how a conviction could be considered safe?

Like 2sheikhs said earlier why would the cps take the case on
If this is based on one persons word against the other.

That has always made me wonder. Surely they must have more than just what we are hearing at the moment?

I think the "other thing" is him allegedly saying to a 3rd party something along the lines of having terrible secrets or something. I saw it in the papers the other day.

 

[mammutly]

Like 2sheikhs said earlier why would the cps take the case on
If this is based on one persons word against the other.

That has always made me wonder. Surely they must have more than just what we are hearing at the moment?

I think the "other thing" is him allegedly saying to a 3rd party something along the lines of having terrible secrets or something. I saw it in the papers the other day.

The timeline - chronology will also be important. Whether dates, times, context of the allegations are coherent.

 

[Paladin]

I've been a juror on two rape cases. In one case the judge stopped the trial and directed the jury to return a 'not guilty' verdict. In the other case we were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

From what we are reading about the Le Vell case, I would imagine there isn't enough evidence to convince the jury of guilt. Whatever the truth of the matter, his life and career are in tatters, and the alleged victim may well have psychological damage. Very sad.

 

[tidyman]

Iwe were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right. Are you saying you were stuck on 9/3 guilty but because you couldn't convince one of the three to go guilty, you all agreed to go not guilty?

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

Iwe were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right. Are you saying you were stuck on 9/3 guilty but because you couldn't convince one of the three to go guilty, you all agreed to go not guilty?

I think he means the judge will have instructed that he would accept a 10-2majority verdict but that couldn't be achieved. As a consequence, it means not guilty

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

One of the best things that the signing of the Magna Carter in 1215 at Runnymede ensured was firstly the right of everyone to be tried by ones peers, and secondly that every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

I just hope that all this media circus that is following this case doesn't result in a miscarriage of justice either way.

However who was it that said "It's better that 100 guilty men go free, than one innocent man be convicted"

 

[tidyman]

Iwe were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right. Are you saying you were stuck on 9/3 guilty but because you couldn't convince one of the three to go guilty, you all agreed to go not guilty?

I think he means the judge will have instructed that he would accept a 10-2majority verdict but that couldn't be achieved. As a consequence, it means not guilty

No it doesn't. Assuming he is talking about in this country.

 

[Anonymous]

I've been a juror on two rape cases. In one case the judge stopped the trial and directed the jury to return a 'not guilty' verdict. In the other case we were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

From what we are reading about the Le Vell case, I would imagine there isn't enough evidence to convince the jury of guilt. Whatever the truth of the matter, his life and career are in tatters, and the alleged victim may well have psychological damage. Very sad.

He's apparently already been promised his job back , if he's cleared , so his career certainly won't be over , and neither will his life ...... one time rape allegations , a crown court trial , together with being held in custody in prison , certainly don't appear to have done the likes of Craig Charles much harm over the past 19 years!!

 

[cyberblue]

I've been a juror on two rape cases. In one case the judge stopped the trial and directed the jury to return a 'not guilty' verdict. In the other case we were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

From what we are reading about the Le Vell case, I would imagine there isn't enough evidence to convince the jury of guilt. Whatever the truth of the matter, his life and career are in tatters, and the alleged victim may well have psychological damage. Very sad.

How can you sudenly find them not guilty if you cant get 10-2 majority .surley the judge would redirect

 

[mcmanus]

To be fair Mamba if you are a celebrity charged with 'mud sticks' sorta crimes it's shit before the trial and if you are guilty it's hell but on the flip side if you are found innocent/not guilty the press do tell the world.

Some blokes found completely innocent always seem to be judged a bit odd.

 

[cyberblue]

It'll be interesting to see how it goes. Purely a guess based on his reactions, I would say he's guilty, but then again i've not heard or seen her reactions as she's behind a curtain, so to speak.

The think is though you can't guess when the rest of someone's life is at stake. Like I said earlier I have no idea if he is guilty or not. If I were sat on that jury I would have to be pretty certain to send a man down for x years.

I agree. And if its just his word against hers then I can't see how a conviction could be considered safe?

The CPS have either dropped one allmighty bollock or they have something up there sleeve

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

I've been a juror on two rape cases. In one case the judge stopped the trial and directed the jury to return a 'not guilty' verdict. In the other case we were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

From what we are reading about the Le Vell case, I would imagine there isn't enough evidence to convince the jury of guilt. Whatever the truth of the matter, his life and career are in tatters, and the alleged victim may well have psychological damage. Very sad.

How can you sudenly find them not guilty if you cant get 10-2 majority .surley the judge would redirect

And probably call a retrial.

 

[Paladin]

Iwe were split 6v6 when we retired. We persuaded three of the accused's guilt. Two others did not enter debate at all, for some very misguided reasons (they were a disgrace to our system of justice). We found the accused not guilty eventually, because we couldn't reach a 10-2 majority.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right. Are you saying you were stuck on 9/3 guilty but because you couldn't convince one of the three to go guilty, you all agreed to go not guilty?

I think he means the judge will have instructed that he would accept a 10-2majority verdict but that couldn't be achieved. As a consequence, it means not guilty

Yes, this is correct.

 

[Anonymous]

To be fair Mamba if you are a celebrity charged with 'mud sticks' sorta crimes it's shit before the trial and if you are guilty it's hell but on the flip side if you are found innocent/not guilty the press do tell the world.

Some blokes found completely innocent always seem to be judged a bit odd.

It's clearly not the 'end of the world' though if you find yourself acquitted of such crimes .... people DO cope !

 

[tidyman]

I'm not sure I'm reading this right. Are you saying you were stuck on 9/3 guilty but because you couldn't convince one of the three to go guilty, you all agreed to go not guilty?

I think he means the judge will have instructed that he would accept a 10-2majority verdict but that couldn't be achieved. As a consequence, it means not guilty

Yes, this is correct.

Well I know it's your story and everything but it quite clearly isn't correct.

A hung jury is a completely different scenario to a not guilty verdict.

 

[mcmanus]

To be fair Mamba if you are a celebrity charged with 'mud sticks' sorta crimes it's shit before the trial and if you are guilty it's hell but on the flip side if you are found innocent/not guilty the press do tell the world.

Some blokes found completely innocent always seem to be judged a bit odd.

It's clearly not the 'end of the world' though if you find yourself acquitted of such crimes .... people DO cope !

Once got charged with assault (completely innocent but went to Magistrates) locked up for a day when arrested and that pissed me right off. Bored senseless I got thinking what if it was say murder or rape ..... you're head would explode.

Horrible story. Surely the jurors could opt out of such a case because that information should be left to strong willed characters who can give a straight judgement and not be swayed.

 

[Anonymous]

To be fair Mamba if you are a celebrity charged with 'mud sticks' sorta crimes it's shit before the trial and if you are guilty it's hell but on the flip side if you are found innocent/not guilty the press do tell the world.

Some blokes found completely innocent always seem to be judged a bit odd.

It's clearly not the 'end of the world' though if you find yourself acquitted of such crimes .... people DO cope !

Once got charged with assault (completely innocent but went to Magistrates) locked up for a day when arrested and that pissed me right off. Bored senseless I got thinking what if it was say murder or rape ..... you're head would explode.

Horrible story. Surely the jurors could opt out of such a case because that information should be left to strong willed characters who can give a straight judgement and not be swayed.

Yeah , look at that story the other day where that woman was murdered and a judge and jury sent a man down for six years (she was his girlfriend apparently) ..... they only had to release him after he'd served the six years as they'd suddenly realised they got the wrong man !

Now the real culprit , caught by chance , is starting a sentence !

The police have apologised to him , how nice of them eh?

If i'd been him i would have told them to get f**ked, and commenced legal proceedings !