- Dec 27, 2016
- 26,879
- 56,878
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The defence will certainly appeal unless there is an aquittal on all murder charges. A question will be how much Legal Aid is prepared to spend on an appeal.
On the evidence and trial history there seem to be very few grounds for an appeal. Hall has been scrupulously fair and the defence had every opportunity to mount a significant case but chose not to. Even the defence cross examinations were totally bland; they tended to assist the court in clarifying elements of evidence that did not get explained well in the prosecution lead . This of course is not a problem as the defence are as much officers of the court as the prosecution (even Hall got into the game by asking fairly obvious questions that prosecution and defence had missed).
The appeal will mostly come down to elements in the written judgement which we are unlikley to see for some months.
Let’s hope he gives up SS body location.I'm also thinking we won't hear any negotiation on body locations, if remembered, until after an appeal is heard or denied
Let’s hope he gives up SS body location.
I think he’ll be found guilty charges relating to CG
Still 50/50 on charges with JR
Not guilty (unless the defence pulls out last minute) on SS charges.
Good question on this one PR!as an individual gut feel rather than a court perspective, do you feel he's guilty on SS? if so, why?
I’m going to go out here on a limb first thoughts what you have. But I’m hopeful Yovich might save his best for last!I propose a guessing contest for the length of closing addresses. Not sure what first prize would be yet. Winner is closest to the actual time.
My guesses:
Prosecution 1 day
Defence 40 minutes.
Edit: I'm being serious!! (for once)
My bad, Unless the prosecution pulls out regarding the charges to SS.as an individual gut feel rather than a court perspective, do you feel he's guilty on SS? if so, why?
I agree with exception to the last sentence. IMO I don’t think he is of high intelligence. Cold and calculating? I agree there.IMHO there is no chance at all he will be found guilty for SS, as there was not one scrap of evidence which pointed to him and i don't think he will ever give her location up (if he is guilty). I say this because he has come across as very calm and demure throughout the trial. In fact he has basically said and done nothing! No hint of his personality at all. Too me this says he is very cold and calculating and so he will hold onto this information, but, I would not be surprised if at some if he hints to the truth to a cell mate. I think he thinks hes too smart for every one.
IMHO there is no chance at all he will be found guilty for SS, as there was not one scrap of evidence which pointed to him and i don't think he will ever give her location up (if he is guilty). I say this because he has come across as very calm and demure throughout the trial. In fact he has basically said and done nothing! No hint of his personality at all. Too me this says he is very cold and calculating and so he will hold onto this information, but, I would not be surprised if at some if he hints to the truth to a cell mate. I think he thinks hes too smart for every one.
Good question on this one PR!
I think he’s guilty on this but there is doubt as well. We don’t really have anything solid ?
Do you have any thoughts on this on what Might be considered solid?
Agree 100%.I thought the same thing about the evidence issue and even queried how a charge could be laid. According to lawyers 100% circumstantial evidence and or propensity is enough on SS due to the similarities with other crimes.
That's why I ask on gut feel, do you think he's guilty of SS. If it's yes because of the Huntigdale, HH, KK and CG; then I feel the courts will see it the same way.
No alibi, consistent lies and unreliable witness, DNA, fibre, similarities in crimes in my opinion will see him found guilty on all 3 girls and associated charges.
My gut tells me he took SS, but my conscience keeps popping up saying maybe he didnt!I thought the same thing about the evidence issue and even queried how a charge could be laid. According to lawyers 100% circumstantial evidence and or propensity is enough on SS due to the similarities with other crimes.
That's why I ask on gut feel, do you think he's guilty of SS. If it's yes because of the Huntigdale, HH, KK and CG; then I feel the courts will see it the same way.
No alibi, consistent lies and unreliable witness, DNA, fibre, similarities in crimes in my opinion will see him found guilty on all 3 girls and associated charges.
My gut tells me he took SS, but my conscience keeps popping up saying maybe he didnt!
I propose a guessing contest for the length of closing addresses. Not sure what first prize would be yet. Winner is closest to the actual time.
My guesses:
Prosecution 1 day
Defence 40 minutes.
Edit: I'm being serious!! (for once)
I thought the same thing about the evidence issue and even queried how a charge could be laid. According to lawyers 100% circumstantial evidence and or propensity is enough on SS due to the similarities with other crimes.
That's why I ask on gut feel, do you think he's guilty of SS. If it's yes because of the Huntigdale, HH, KK and CG; then I feel the courts will see it the same way.
No alibi, consistent lies and unreliable witness, DNA, fibre, similarities in crimes in my opinion will see him found guilty on all 3 girls and associated charges.
Yovich might blow us away on closing arguments, something to do with the weather in Gosnells.
Its possible. Depends on how Hall sees it (from page 43)rather than a finding of not guilty on the SS charge, is it possible to have a finding that says the prosecution haven't proven there case by lack of evidence, so the charge is dismissed, which then means he can be tried for the crime later?
Its possible. Depends on how Hall sees it (from page 43)
207. In R v Yl97 the Director of Public Prosecutions attempted to file a nolle prosequi in order to avoid the trial judge finalising the matter. 208. Crispin J stated: 73. As Macrossan CJ and Thomas J pointed out in R v Jell, ex parte Attorney-General (1991) 1 Qd R 48 it is possible to identify some instances of an abuse of process justifying the Courts in refusing to permit the entry of a nolle prosequi. The instances which their Honours noted were:
(i) where the jury, by request for redirection, may have so signalled their likely verdict that an "unscrupulous prosecutor" might seek to avoid it by entering a nolle prosequi even at that late stage;
(ii) where the case has gone badly for the prosecution and it is conceivable that it might turn out better in a subsequent trial; (
The issue is the State were always going to struggle to link SS without anything but propensity. Even the witness evidence wasnt definitive
Could the Prosecution use Nolle Prosequi ? Sure - will Hall allow them to is the question
Prosecution onlyto use this nolle prosequi, who makes the choice to apply it? is it something from the prosecution to save the charge for later, or is it initiated by the judge which suggests he believes the accused is possibly guilty, but the guilt hasn't been proven beyond reasonable doubt?
Valid question. Opine may have a better understandingwhat is required for nolle prosequi to happen and how is it controlled to ensure its not a backdoor to usurping double jeopardy trials?
I think its Prosecution only.im thinking there must of been something for the charge to be allowed in the first place, such as the propensity evidence linking the three abductions. so if the propensity links the three, the accused is convicted of 2, but the third isnt proven by evidence, would that be enough to push the judge to run with nolle prosequi rather than not guilty?
Prosecution only
Valid question. Opine may have a better understanding
NP from recall is usually used when a witness may be unavailable due to medical issues , when even the defendant may be ill ie I think Ric Marshall is/was under an NP order - the charges were withdrawn but the Prosecution asked for the right to re-lay them once Marshall returned to health enough to answer the charges ie its not a get out of jail card for Marshall .
I think the pdf also mentioned - and I think this may be pertinent - that if a charge cant be sustained but may be if compelling evidence is presented ie the body and forensics of SS - the risk of course is laying the charge in the 1st place
Again it may be a tactic but its a fine line
I think its Prosecution only.
Barbagallo will have to introduce NP BEFORE she starts her final submission. Once she hands over the States case to the Judge its in his hands what verdict he returns and a Not Guilty cannot then be traded to an NP one
This has been mentioned a few times recently & the situation on double jeopardy laws for murder and serious assault is that they've been abolished for years & they can take you back to trial on a charge if additional evidence is uncovered that would have been likey to convict you had it been available originally. So its not a problem they went for it with the slimmest chance. They havent blown it if evidence does comes up.to ensure its not a backdoor to usurping double jeopardy trials? abductions. so if the propensity links the three, the accused is convicted of 2, but the third isnt proven by evidence, would that be enough to push the judge to run with nolle prosequi rather than not guilty?
The Sunday Times understands Mr Edwards is permanently housed in Casuarina’s crisis care unit and has been since the incident which almost brought undone WA’s biggest ever criminal prosecution ... It was decided Mr Edwards could not go back into the general prison population, so important was his health and safety. But it is understood authorities also didn’t want him placed in the prison’s Special Protection Unit — reserved for the few former police officers, detectives, prison officers who may require protection from the general population. So he was housed in the crisis care unit — simply because there’s nowhere else for him to go. “The approved management plan is considered to be the most appropriate at this time to ensure the prisoner’s safety and welfare and to maintain the good order of the prison,” a Department of Justice spokesman said. Ironically, despite all the eyes upon him, Mr Edwards’ day-to-day life behind bars is largely solitary and highly regimented. He showers alone, eats alone and has a completely different schedule to the rest of the prison.
During Mr Edwards’ marathon trial, his cell was set up with an Xbox and an extension cord after the crisis care unit was put into lockdown at 5.30pm. In that time — because the rest of the unit was locked down with other prisoners unable to move around — he was free to roam, get snacks from the kitchen and even stretch his legs in the unit’s garden. Once his gaming console was set up, and after his return from court, Mr Edwards was allowed four hours to play before the extension cord was removed and the lights went out.
it is understood it is not the crimes and allegations against Mr Edwards that make him unpopular with his fellow inmates — he is disliked because they feel he is treated as “Mr Special”. Inmates are disgruntled by his different routine, the fact he is kept away from the general population, and other prisoners are told to “stop everything” when he’s moved throughout the jail.
it is understood it is not the crimes and allegations against Mr Edwards that make him unpopular with his fellow inmates — he is disliked because they feel he is treated as “Mr Special”. Inmates are disgruntled by his different routine, the fact he is kept away from the general population, and other prisoners are told to “stop everything” when he’s moved throughout the jail.
the general consensus among the guards who constantly watch WA’s highest profile prisoner is that he is a polite, clean, courteous, “no-issues” inmate.