PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Jazzman said:
Firstly, I need to say that I am not a lawyer. Secondly, that English is not my first language. However my subjective gut feeling about that Daily Mail article was that it did not clearly enough talk about the In Dubio Pro Reo principle and what should mean for the City case. I thought the article was somewhat written to the taste of the Mail readers who want to see City punished.
Is that completely misunderstood dear Mr. Projectriver?
Click to expand...
IMG_5058.jpeg
 
Jazzman said:
Firstly, I need to say that I am not a lawyer. Secondly, that English is not my first language. However my subjective gut feeling about that Daily Mail article was that it did not clearly enough talk about the In Dubio Pro Reo principle and what should mean for the City case. I thought the article was somewhat written to the taste of the Mail readers who want to see City punished.
Is that completely misunderstood dear Mr. Projectriver?
Click to expand...
It is not a criminal case so the principle of innocent until proved guilty does not strictly apply. However, in this case the PL are effectively alleging that City’s accounts were faked which is criminal and some would say that the PL has a very high burden of proof.
 
KS55 said:
It is not a criminal case so the principle of innocent until proved guilty does not strictly apply. However, in this case the PL are effectively alleging that City’s accounts were faked which is criminal and some would say that the PL has a very high burden of proof.
Click to expand...
Thank you KS55. The thing is that has been explained to death and quite clearly already in this thread by different people including projectriver. It did not appear to me to be explained with equal clarity in that Mail piece, and I was wondering why. Perhaps it is just me who cannot read English properly, or is it perhaps the lawyer who goes very far in order to allow for the possibility that what we are charged with might be true? If the charges are so hard to prove (what was the term? Balance of probability?) then why is that article not reflecting that? The article gave me the impression that the PL has a good chance of winning this battle. That is not really the impression I have from this present thread. Why the discrepancy? Or am I reading the article all wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.