>> As soon as he dumped the car on the road, he was right to be
>> nicked, and the jury should have done him.
But they didn't.
Like the Colston statue it could have been because the prosecution made their case lamely, the Judge's directions were lacking or the jury returned a perverse decision because it seemed right to them.
As research involving jurors is illegal we'll never know.
I wonder whether a lay bench of locals would have acquitted if he'd not elected for Crown Court.
A legally qualified District Judge (ie a Stipendiary Magistrate) would very probably have convicted.
I don't think the Attorney General will be considering a reference to the Court of Appeal as she did with Colston :-P
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 6 Feb 22 at 17:44
|
