If she arranged the meet then she assisted, why is that not clear as day?
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I did note the gym had a bit of a posting break in Feb 2023 on social media
It’s joint enterprise. He may not have done it on his own, she may not have done it on her own but together they agreed to do it and together they did it.
Not the main one, posted almost daily through Feb. I’m suprised they haven’t been run out of town, they must have spun a good yarn to distance themselves from their homicidal sadistic nephew/son to have so many people still giving them business & to still be so confidently promoting it……..I find it quite sickening how they still have a picture of him proudly on their page & quite indicative of their feelings towards him actually……..
Really? They didn't commit any crime. I'm sure this has devestated them and they've had to show up to work every day regardless because they have bills to pay like the rest of society
Yup which is why even if they say she has secondary liability, she will still get the same or a very similar sentence.
Absolutely this
. He is the criminal here, not his extended family.
God help Boy Y’s defence in the closing speech.
They have nothing to go off, all evidence of physical stabbing points to him.
Girl X’s defence did a good job, alluding that she was in her own little world, yes planning a murder but only in “fantasy land”. Referencing other people she had talked about killing, and explaining how she was lying and detailing things which never happened. Girl X is easy to defend when it comes to the actual stabbing, as no physical evidence concludes she ever participated nor touched any weapons. Her defence is pretty well thought out, insinuating that this was all fantasy and she believed it wasn’t going to happen therefore she didn’t physically plan the murder with intent for it to become a reality.
A bunch of bollcoks when you think back to the Ibuprofen scandal, which clearly implies the intent to kill. What makes her stabbing plan any different, it was carried out.
I think Boy Y’s defence will include the following
Boy Y wasn’t planning the murder thinking it was real, as he forgot about the murder when Girl X said she was excited about tomorrow. He said “oh i forgot”
They may try and use the fact Boy Y said he went along with things to ensure he kept friends. The reason for him googling better ways to kill as an explanation, to say he wanted to keep Girl X thinking they were friends and in agreement.
They might try and blame the fact Girl X was allegedly saying if he kills Brianna, she will help him get with Girl A.
They also may try and allude that he would have never participated in the murder had Girl X not made the plan in the first place.
They cannot at all defend the evidence which leads to only him stabbing Brianna. But they will try go along with the fact that he bent down etc and all stab wounds inflicted by Girl X were soaked up by the fluffy coat.
In my opinion, only Boy Y will be found guilty of killing. Both will be found guilty of planning which is enough to make sure they’re both sentenced.
They have nothing to go off, all evidence of physical stabbing points to him.
Girl X’s defence did a good job, alluding that she was in her own little world, yes planning a murder but only in “fantasy land”. Referencing other people she had talked about killing, and explaining how she was lying and detailing things which never happened. Girl X is easy to defend when it comes to the actual stabbing, as no physical evidence concludes she ever participated nor touched any weapons. Her defence is pretty well thought out, insinuating that this was all fantasy and she believed it wasn’t going to happen therefore she didn’t physically plan the murder with intent for it to become a reality.
A bunch of bollcoks when you think back to the Ibuprofen scandal, which clearly implies the intent to kill. What makes her stabbing plan any different, it was carried out.
I think Boy Y’s defence will include the following
Boy Y wasn’t planning the murder thinking it was real, as he forgot about the murder when Girl X said she was excited about tomorrow. He said “oh i forgot”
They may try and use the fact Boy Y said he went along with things to ensure he kept friends. The reason for him googling better ways to kill as an explanation, to say he wanted to keep Girl X thinking they were friends and in agreement.
They might try and blame the fact Girl X was allegedly saying if he kills Brianna, she will help him get with Girl A.
They also may try and allude that he would have never participated in the murder had Girl X not made the plan in the first place.
They cannot at all defend the evidence which leads to only him stabbing Brianna. But they will try go along with the fact that he bent down etc and all stab wounds inflicted by Girl X were soaked up by the fluffy coat.
In my opinion, only Boy Y will be found guilty of killing. Both will be found guilty of planning which is enough to make sure they’re both sentenced.
They are charged with murder, that is the only crime they can each be convicted of. It’s not split into killing and planning.
The evidence is very clear they were both involved in murdering Brianna and they should both be found guilty. I expect nothing less.
Whilst knowing exactly who did what may answer some questions, it fortunately does not actually matter in terms of securing a murder conviction. They are both culpable, they both played their part in this horrific crime and they will both get long sentences (although probably not long enough).
Because that alone - literally a fact on its own -wouldn’t be enough. Of course it shouldn’t be.
There’s a lot of evidence why imo Girl X should be found guilty.
I can’t say she IS guilty because that would be wrong; it’s an ongoing trial, we have a duty not to prejudice it, and the verdict is still to be given.
Well she assisted in many ways, not just one - but the fact she lured someone to their death by arranging this meet is clear as day.
That’s for the jury to decide
I was unclear earlier in a reply to you and it’s too late to edit so to put it more clearly to address your confusion of why the judge said the jury can find only one guilty, despite “it being joint enterprise”: the prosecution is arguing joint enterprise, but that doesn’t mean the jury has to accept it’s joint enterprise.
Of course, and I think they will since she assisted with the luring, the written plans, the alibi, the fake text messages to herself, pretending to not know Brianna was dead. Alot of assistance.That’s for the jury to decide
I was unclear earlier in a reply to you and it’s too late to edit so to put it more clearly to address your confusion of why the judge said the jury can find only one guilty, despite “it being joint enterprise”: the prosecution is arguing joint enterprise, but that doesn’t mean the jury has to accept it’s joint enterprise.
I thought RP did a decent job there with X's closing defence. For me she is guilty all day, but if there are any flowery types on the jury, they might be swayed by X's fantasy world aspect and the deliberations could drag on a bit. A guilty verdict for Y is surely cut and dried. I doubt they'll spend much time debating that.
I saw the pics of him kickboxing. Looks a big, strong lad for 15, or however old he was then.
I saw the pics of him kickboxing. Looks a big, strong lad for 15, or however old he was then.
I’ve been there a few times in the last couple of weeks, there has been a lot of noise from the cells. It is NOT these two. It’s other prisoners unhappy and causing trouble.
Have you watched the trial?
If found guilty she won’t get any other charges except the one they are trying her for, murder. The definition of murder is a person of sound mind who unlawfully kills another human being under the kings peace with intent to kill. Her involvement proves intent. If the CPS were not confident they could convict her of murder, they would have her in court for a lesser charge. I think due to the circumstances of this case and her involvement, charging her with assisting an offender would not make sense. She did so much more than just assist Y to commit murder.
It’s their business - how does letting it fail help the rest of their family? They all still need to live after he’s been sent down.
His family are not responsible for his crimes. If they were, they would be up in court too. Imagine moving towns and shutting down your business just because your weirdo cousin killed someone, what would that achieve? His family are victims of this too, we don’t know their family dynamic but they have (even if it’s his own fault) lost somebody that they loved too. I can’t imagine what it’s like to have a member of the family that’s not only committed this offence, but the whole entire world know about it too.
I meant assisting in the way the judge worded it. The mere act of assisting or encouraging carries the same charge under joint enterprise. One or both stabbed, one or both assisted - thats it, they don't have to show who did what to apply the same charge.
- Status