http://www.nzherald.co.nz/david-bain-case/news/article.cfm?c_id=1500919&objectid=10447122
Solicitor - General
"I want to emphasise, that under our system of justice, it is a jury, which determines guilt or innocence in a case such as this. The jury reaches its conclusion after it has considered all of the evidence and after receiving directions on the law from the trial Judge. Guilt or innocence of an accused person is not decided by the media or public opinion polls. Those who attempt to usurp or otherwise influence the trial process risk facing a charge of contempt of Court"
The Solicitor General defines what the Law is before David's trial, so why are we now left with this nonsense, or qualification of some other test of innocence? Any other test is unconstitutional and unlawful and will not be accepted unless accompanied by compensation for unlawful imprisonment.
The Solicitor General in his definition above of Contempt of Court had clearly not anticipated that his warning ought also have extended to stalking and defaming Jurors and witnesses, also distributing and reprinting the Trial MS without the Judges permission, or a steady flow of misinformation to undermine confidence in the Justice system. - but he knows now hate-siters, he knows now.
Hear that Lucky, Stockdale and others? He knows now.
People don't like to lose, and this sorry lot made such a big fuss prior to the retrail, that they have to blame it on something, because accepting they were wrong, is just too hard.
ReplyDeleteIt couldn't be their fault, so it must be the law that is wrong!
I feel sorry for them in some ways because of the enormous kumaras they have to suck.
ReplyDelete