They've basically given everything away. I had to do jury service and sat on a couple of trials we had to say if we knew the defendant either personally or knew of him or his family before the trial started ,the judge would then have dismissed anyone that this applied to. There wouldn't be many that could say they didn't know the German with the amount of press coverage this case is getting..this. I’m shocked they’ve given so much away.
I've just said this.. I have sat on a jury and that's very true everything you've posteda trial by media isn’t evidence. It exerts prejudices and bias certainly, but every jury will have some element of that.
The jury would probably be asked if they were aware. In a high profile case such as this though, it’s probably unreasonable to expect them not to have some sort of awareness.
they would most definitely be instructed by the judge, to base their verdict on what they are presented with in a courtroom and they will likely be instructed to leave preconceived ideas at the door.
also, a jury isn’t expected to just agree on guilty or not guilty. Instead the judge will issue a criteria -a list on what they must base their decision on. So in essence, a judge will guide them in how they approach their verdict, and make sure its done on a logical basis.
Depends on what the Hypothetical “evidence” was.That’s really interesting to know! Do you know if, for example, the Portuguese policeman who wrote the book about the McCanns, if he has left the police force now, would he ever be allowed to share that information publicly? Or would that be illegal?
Hi, exactly this but there is a huge difference in knowing a defendant and being aware of media coverage on him.They've basically given everything away. I had to do jury service and sat on a couple of trials we had to say if we knew the defendant either personally or knew of him or his family before the trial started ,the judge would then have dismissed anyone that this applied to. There wouldn't be many that could say they didn't know the German with the amount of press coverage this case is getting..
who cares? No one is here to explain basic stuff over and over again to the hard of thinking. Take yourself off snooze and read the threadNo I’m more than open to hearing the opposing side with explanation and evidence which they think leads to their reasoning. It just doesn’t happen from the people who don’t think the McCanns were boring. It’s just ‘I think they weren’t, that’s it. They weren’t. You’re sinister and sexist if you think they were’. Which makes for a boring discussion. Hence the snooze button. xx
Quick google indicates there is no trial by jury in GermanySo would the German ever be tried even if they had some kind of evidence as all the press coverage would bias the jury would it not ?
I’ve also sat on a jury twice and it’s true. You are only allowed to go by the evidence provided in court. Someone else who was on the second jury I sat on (a rape case) was dismissed from the case for coming back one day with notes giving their opinion based on things they had searched online.They've basically given everything away. I had to do jury service and sat on a couple of trials we had to say if we knew the defendant either personally or knew of him or his family before the trial started ,the judge would then have dismissed anyone that this applied to. There wouldn't be many that could say they didn't know the German with the amount of press coverage this case is getting..
I've just said this.. I have sat on a jury and that's very true everything you've posted
I read that too.Quick google indicates there is no trial by jury in Germany
Probably after a verdict is reached. We may not be given all the details though (I don’t think I could handle hearing it anyway tbh).Assuming this goes to court will we as the public get told how/what happened? This sounds like a really thick question I’m sorryand probably sounds really awful and nosy of me. The press trip over themselves with contradictions it’s be nice to have something laid out bare for once in this case
I haven’t followed this closely, but if the crime took place in Portugal, I’d imagine it would be up to Portugal to conduct a trial, as it was their jurisdiction. Given that three nationalities are involved, it’s tricky!Quick google indicates there is no trial by jury in Germany
That... is a nightmare for all involvedSomeone else who was on the second jury I sat on (a rape case) was dismissed from the case for coming back one day with notes giving their opinion based on things they had searched online.
I don't mean this thread. I was reacting to a comment that was reacting to a commentSorry, but where have you been? Plenty of people criticise them as parents. You only have to go on any comments section of any article or thread about them to see that.
Yes I know but I'm thinking the defence will play on the fact too many details have been released about him and we don't know what sort of facts they have to put forward .People don't always come clean with their thoughts on a defendant ...I’ve also sat on a jury twice and it’s true. You are only allowed to go by the evidence provided in court. Someone else who was on the second jury I sat on (a rape case) was dismissed from the case for coming back one day with notes giving their opinion based on things they had searched online.
I read that too.
Probably after a verdict is reached. We may not be given all the details though (I don’t think I could handle hearing it anyway tbh).
Absolutely they don't have to please me but I'm allowed to have an opinion on them. They may very well be victims of a crime and they may well be the criminals. You seem to have a blind loyalty to them. If they hadn't left their kid it wouldn't have happened. Leaving your kid is not a normal thing to do. Let's cut to the chase. They left their kids time and time again and if this hadn't have happened they would have continued to leave them. In my world that is a shit parent.But also, they don’t have to please the general public as parents. They don’t have to meet your approval. They’re victims of a crime. Crimes happen to everyone, good people, bad people and in between people. What you think of them isn’t really important. What do you want, for them to impress you?!
and that’s not even touching on the inherent sexism of kate not behaving the way a woman is expected to.
Do we know that's where the( imaginary) trial will be it could be Porto if that's where the crime took place..Quick google indicates there is no trial by jury in Germany
Thank you for explaining this.absolutely.
From an investigative viewpoint also;
Sometimes you know the individual is guilty as hell. But there’s a difference between “intelligence” and “evidence”
even when you find evidence, it has to be properly handled or else it becomes inadmissible - you’d be shocked at how draconian this can be. for example, in her youth Hillary Clinton managed to get a non-guilty verdict for a guy who’d had sex with a child. The child’s underwear had been cut up - the semen/dna piece had been kept and served as evidence. The leftover bits were lost. Hillary successful argued that the chain of evidence therefore, had been broken. the DNA/Semen sample wasn’t presented in court as a result, so the jury never heard about it’s existence. It was a clear cut case, The man had sex with an underage girl, but the evidence wasn’t handled in accordance with draconian rules and thereby because pretty much irrelevant - it’s an example of how the law really is an ass.
even when you have evidence, and youve handled it properly; it has to be agreed in advance of any trial and the prosecuting body has to agree it is sufficient to progress - due to the high court costs this isn’t any easy feat.
I often hear people say that juries “hear all the evidence” but actually, they usually only hear a proportion thats been agreed in advance. Evidence that is very damning sometimes doesn’t get heard at all - because it might bias the jury.
another thing that is misunderstood about criminal trials - they don’t just seek to get a guilty/non guilty verdict. They must also be “safe verdicts” aka not one that can be appealed later down the line - and again, people would be truly shocked at the mundane things people successfully appeal over.
so in summary - the Portuguese police might’ve known something no one else does, hence their conviction and assuredness in pursuing the McCanns. Or they might have just decided to go down the easiest, seemingly most obvious route.
logically, I would concur that the McCanns could absolutely have been responsible, even accidentally, and there could’ve been a wealth of information in existence that isn’t in the public sphere.
intuitively though, I don’t think they are involved.
They only rarely use juries in Portugal tooDo we know that's where the( imaginary) trial will be it could be Porto if that's where the crime took place..
Absolutely they don't have to please me but I'm allowed to have an opinion on them. They may very well be victims of a crime and they may well be the criminals. You seem to have a blind loyalty to them. If they hadn't left their kid it wouldn't have happened. Leaving your kid is not a normal thing to do. Let's cut to the chase. They left their kids time and time again and if this hadn't have happened they would have continued to leave them. In my world that is a shit parent.
Yes I know but I'm thinking the defence will play on the fact too many details have been released about him and we don't know what sort of facts they have to put forward .People don't always come clean with their thoughts on a defendant ...
The defence would undoubtedly bring this up. In a U.K. court room it would probably leverage some sort of favourable action or process towards the defendant.Yes I know but I'm thinking the defence will play on the fact too many details have been released about him and we don't know what sort of facts they have to put forward .People don't always come clean with their thoughts on a defendant ...
I had to do jury duty of a reasonably high profile murder trial last year and I was shocked at the terrible reporting of the prosecutions‘ case by the press. They’d drop in and out and weave a story together that was at best incorrect and at worst misleading. Everyone agreed the murderer was guilty, but it was actually far more sinister than the press made it out to be.Assuming this goes to court will we as the public get told how/what happened? This sounds like a really thick question I’m sorryand probably sounds really awful and nosy of me. The press trip over themselves with contradictions it’s be nice to have something laid out bare for once in this case
I wholeheartedly agree on your thoughts on the press.I had to do jury duty of a reasonably high profile murder trial last year and I was shocked at the terrible reporting of the prosecutions‘ case by the press. They’d drop in and out and weave a story together that was at best incorrect and at worst misleading. Everyone agreed the murderer was guilty, but it was actually far more sinister than the press made it out to be.
I am sharing this just to say that I don’t trust the press to either A) always report on cases effectively and B) even with the full story (if we ever get it) that the press will portray it without holes or bias
Now you're being ridiculous. Do you think it was okay for Kate and gerry to leave their children then? Because that's what I'm reading.They only rarely use juries in Portugal too
I don’t have any loyalty to them. But I don’t recall sarah Palins parents being criticised? She was alone when she was abducted. April jones? Alone. They weren’t left to sleep alone but they were playing without adult supervison. Are they shit parents too? I have never been heard anyone blame them (Quite rightly) why are the McCanns so different?
I presume you mean Sarah Payne bit of a difference she was 8 and she wasn’t alone she had been playing in a field with her brother and sisters. April Jones was 5 and had been playing outside her house with a friend. Kate and Gerry left 3 toddlers in a unlocked apt in a different country while they ate and drank on numerous occasionsThey only rarely use juries in Portugal too
I don’t have any loyalty to them. But I don’t recall sarah Palins parents being criticised? She was alone when she was abducted. April jones? Alone. They weren’t left to sleep alone but they were playing without adult supervison. Are they shit parents too? I have never been heard anyone blame them (Quite rightly) why are the McCanns so different?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?