• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Harrys Trial

Defence basically tells it like it is. Any normal person can see its just nonsense that shouldnt have even got to court on that "evidence"
 
Harry, whose paid over 8m in taxes, is being chased for 30k more of taxes because he lied to a news of the world reporter?

Is that about the crux of it?

yes, and that the taxman hasn't got any other credible evidence usually required for this type of prosecution.
 
Judge tells jury they may have sympathy with defendants' long wait for this trial, but verdicts must be decided on evidence not sympathy

Judge hands jury document titled 'Steps to Verdict'. Jury asked to follow it. For example, can only find guilty if believe tax was avoided

Judge tells jury there's scenario where they can find Redknapp not guilty and Mandaric guilty. They must not find R guilty and M not guilty

Judge says both Redknapp and Mandaric are of 'good character' and tells jury that might mean more likely they should believe their evidence

Judge: "One of first questions you'll need to ask yourselves is - what was the Monaco payment for?"
 
Pearcesport James Pearce
"Breaking - jury in the Redknapp/Mandaric trial has been sent out to begin considering verdicts"

Squeeky bum time
 
What the chances are some of the jury are arsenal/chelsea/manC/manU fans?

:rolleyes:
 
Read the comment "I haven't followed the trial but I think he's guilty"

I think opinions are things which should be earnt, it's worrying that people who think this way have the same influence in a democracy as those who actually choose to enrich their knowlege and understanding of things.
 
What the chances are some of the jury are arsenal/chelsea/manC/manU fans?

:rolleyes:

If they are it would be ground for a mistrial/appeal.

They said at the beginning of the trial if any of them had strong feelings about football they should declare them.
 
Read the comment "I haven't followed the trial but I think he's guilty"

I think opinions are things which should be earnt, it's worrying that people who think this way have the same influence in a democracy as those who actually choose to enrich their knowlege and understanding of things.

Yep, sadly an all too common problem.
 
Judge has directed the jury to achieve a "unanimous" decision. This to me says he will be found innocent......and judge knows it.
 
If they are it would be ground for a mistrial/appeal.

They said at the beginning of the trial if any of them had strong feelings about football they should declare them.

Surely not hard for them to pretend they're impartial about football even if they're not? The jury is predominantly men, I find it hard to believe some of them aren't big football fans....
 
There will be lunch break between 1 and 2, so if you're waiting for verdicts and there's nothing by 1 then you can rest easy until 2
 
Surely not hard for them to pretend they're impartial about football even if they're not? The jury is predominantly men, I find it hard to believe some of them aren't big football fans....

Might be contempt of court? Not worth the risk in my opinion, but then again some football fans are crazy...
 
When is the final verdict meant to be reached?

There is no set time limit............could take days. Could take minutes.

Obviously, if it was running on ridiculous amount of time, judge can intervene..........like a case a few years back, where it was found jury were all partying at a local hotel and not even discussing the case.
 
if Harry is found not guilty, can the Prosecutors appeal? Likewise if Harry is found guilty can he appeal? I have no idea you see, but it seems in every court case now appeals happen quite regularly.
 
Back