Jump to content

IOM COURTS SENTENCING


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Kopek said:

I,m sure he will Gladys but it will be based on 'old' law/interpretation', not accounting for modern Facebook/MF comment.

The argument is that, on one hand the defendant should be named to allow further accusations to be brought forward and on the other hand to dis-allow further comment as to not prejudice the current trial! That is contrary?

Surely all trials should be 'sub judice' until the verdict or all should allow outside influence to allow for further charges, new information to the furtherence of that trial?

This, of course, comes from the proposed sexual offences law proposals with regard to the defendants rights versus the ability to identify other accusations. ( I'm ambivalent ).

It's a case of one rule for one situation being contrary to the other situation?

..............and, of course, mf v. facebook?

I think John can cope with the legal issues arising from social media, the legal issues won't change much just the situations they are applied to. 

As I said in my explanations, all trials are subject to the sub judice rules. 

Naming someone during a trial just so other accusations can be brought forward isn't much of an argument; if they are guilty they will be named. I am also not sure that further charges can be added that easily during a trial and would need full investigation in any case.  

I think you are thinking more of someone being named during an investigation, but again if they are found  guilty of the matter under investigation they will be named so other allegations can be raised. Of course, during the investigation other offences may be revealed. The problem is mud sticks and, with some offences, there are sections of society who will never accept a not guilty verdict and harass and accuse the innocent defendant on the smoke and fire argument.  

For the stupidity of the average 'punter' I always recall the paediatrician whose home was fire bombed and Cliff Richard who didn't have a happy time either. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 891
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Twenty years ago when the schools became devolved and management of the school budgets lay with the head teachers is when things began to change. The money was and is in exam enrolment.  When the

That was a big McSteak.

Sigh. Why is it that we have to wait for a major incident (jail, controversy on the world wide stage) before someone realises that perhaps expecting workers to come from the U.K. to a different j

Posted Images

....and the Blackpool Chemist who printed someones 'paddle pool' photos and so on.............

That is not the point, when a pending trial is announced, the prosecution will have their case finalised, nothing on MF or FB is going to alter that case, any further accusations can be dealt with independently at a further trial after due consideration?

JW has the advantage of being 'on the case', FB on the other hand can take years to withdraw a comment and years to decide NOT to withdraw a comment. However, on FB it can be a fleeting moment, soon forgotten but on MF it can be a low profile, viewed by few and unlikely to affect a trial verdict?. Same difference????

''.....Naming someone during a trial just so other accusations can be brought forward...''

''During'' is not the same as ''before'' a trial as in the Cliff Richard case. Named during a trial would result in futher charges being brought after the original case.

''...I think you are thinking more of someone being named during an investigation, but again if they are found  guilty of the matter under investigation they will be named so other allegations can be raised....''

Which I think is what I referred to above and whether this is within Natural Justice if only in elongating the time to trial of the original charge/ accusation, it is possible that these further accusations, stemming from the naming of the defendant prior to trial, could be less consequential to the current accusation with the passage of time and acceptance?

Back to sub judice, given that a trial case is in place, could discussion of the person or the case against really prejudice the trial?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was only trying to answer your question, but if it helps further, ignore MF or FB and the respective longevity of comments, they are a bit of a distraction to understanding the concept.  To prejudice a trial I think the prejudicial comments have to have arisen at a time when the trial is ongoing or is in immediate prospect.   

The point being that a jury may read some adverse press comment about the defendant which prejudicially sways their view beyond the evidence that is presented to them.  Prior to the Internet, it would be unlikely that old press commentary could be held as prejudicial, first because you can't prejudice something that didn’t exist at the time of publication,  and secondly, because it is unlikely that a prospective juror would trawl archives news reports.  Of course, the Internet has changed that and a quick Google can reveal all sorts about a person which is why there is now the right to be forgotten (not just for sub judice rules). 

So, for example, in the lead up to the Yorkshire Ripper trial, if the press published something about how, say,  Peter Sutcliffe had been found guilty of murder 10 years prior, that may well be contrary to the sub judice rules, because potential members of the jury could have read that and thought, "well, if he did that, he must have done this". 

The difficulty is that it is not as clear cut as just don't publish anything about the case prior or during it, it depends on what is published and how it may reasonably be expected to influence the jury, which is why most of the press tend to report bald facts before and during a trial, but when the case is decided there is an outflow of "meticulous" analysis of the crime and the person convicted.  Just think of how many times after a big news trial there is a documentary looking at the crime, the perpetrator's history and how they committed the crime.  It is open season once found guilty. Not only because of sub judice but libel laws. 

As I said above, in the main, the sub judice laws are intended to protect the jury from unfair prejudice, the thinking being that due to their experience and knowledge of jurisprudence, judges were above being influenced in such a way. (This was a favourite topic of debate amongst law students.) But, I think it applies to all criminal cases whether or not there is a jury.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

What a fucking loser this woman is. Not even the excuse of being young.

Shame the law doesn't allow for a short, sharp shock for her at the prison.

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=59613&headline=Woman who racially abused nurse is sentenced&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2020&cat=Crime

#racist

Edited by De nada
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2020 at 2:38 AM, Kopek said:

On MF it can be a low profile, viewed by few and unlikely to affect a trial verdict?. Same difference????

Back to sub judice, given that a trial case is in place, could discussion of the person or the case against really prejudice the trial?

MF might have few regular posters but as it’s a public forum it can be read by anyone, it also features fairly highly on Google search results, so it wouldn’t be difficult to search someone by name and the discussions come up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...