Butt/Amir/Asif - Spot Fixing Trial

[smash84]

no consensus?

 

[Prince EWS]

Judge told the jury 20 minutes ago he will now accept a majority decision.

Massive.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Why has he changed it from unanimous to majority? Is that fair?

 

[fredfertang]

Why has he changed it from unanimous to majority? Is that fair?

Whether it's fair is a moot point but that be the law - it doesn't go any further though - if they can't get a 10-2 either way then it's a hung jury and the CPS will have to decide if they want to go for a retrial, although the way cricinfo are reporting it it sounds like they have some verdicts unanimously

 

[ganeshran]

If they are sentenced not guilty, can they re-appeal to ICC to get their bans truncated?

 

[fredfertang]

If they are sentenced not guilty, can they re-appeal to ICC to get their bans truncated?

If you go back a bit in the thread that one has been done to death

 

[Agent Nationaux]

If you go back a bit in the thread that one has been done to death

 

[Prince EWS]

If they are sentenced not guilty, can they re-appeal to ICC to get their bans truncated?

 

[Agent Nationaux]

PEWS, you need to stay away from this thread, otherwise you might have a heart attack.

 

[ganeshran]

If you go back a bit in the thread that one has been done to death

I got upto page 7. Bun's arguments are gold

He even came up with the WWE comparison before Butt did

 

[BoyBrumby]

My guess is his honour allowing a majority decision is good news for the prosecution?

& the phrase "self praise is no praise" just occurred to me. Apropos of what I couldn't say.

 

[ganeshran]

Maybe off topic, but how effective are jury trials compared to those where the sentence is decided by a bench of judges? Arent juries much more susceptible to their internal biases and external influence compared to a judge who is more well versed with the law?

Sorry if this has been discussed before too.

 

[fredfertang]

Maybe off topic, but how effective are jury trials compared to those where the sentence is decided by a bench of judges? Arent juries much more susceptible to their internal biases and external influence compared to a judge who is more well versed with the law?

Sorry if this has been discussed before too.

Definitely off topic but a fair point - it's similar to the way moderators don't always behave in the way the general membership would like them to

 

[zaremba]

Maybe off topic, but how effective are jury trials compared to those where the sentence is decided by a bench of judges? Arent juries much more susceptible to their internal biases and external influence compared to a judge who is more well versed with the law?

Sorry if this has been discussed before too.

Broadly speaking, juries are more likely to acquit than magistrates and professional judges, who are hardened old sods and have heard it all before.

 

[Furball]

My guess is his honour allowing a majority decision is good news for the prosecution?

& the phrase "self praise is no praise" just occurred to me. Apropos of what I couldn't say.

I don't understand your legal system at times.

 

[Howe_zat]

Ours doesn't involve arse splinters, y'see.

 

[fredfertang]

I don't understand your legal system at times.

Says the man whose country's legal system has three possible verdicts in a criminal trial - mind you that extra one you've got seems to get used on internet forums too

 

[Furball]

Not Proven is a better verdict than Not Guilty; particularly given the differing standards applied when it comes to corroboration of evidence.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Maybe off topic, but how effective are jury trials compared to those where the sentence is decided by a bench of judges? Arent juries much more susceptible to their internal biases and external influence compared to a judge who is more well versed with the law?

Yes, but it would be easier for the judges to be bought off by an Indian betting syndicate.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Verdict about to be announced apparently.