the victims blood in the unit
glass in the bed
witness accounts of the verbal exchange
his best mate's statement to police
and the bell ringer......the girl in hospital that may lose an eye
yes, all unsubstantiated at this point
I suppose you were there Spides. A eye-witness to the events of the incident.
What did you see there mate? Blood where? Glass where?
The Police would like to talk to you, you'd better go down to the cop shop and make a statement.
If the police always got it right, no-one would get off and a lot of defence lawyers would be selling ice-creams at football matches.
Statements mean crap unless they are actually tested, thats why we have a court in the first place.
As for the veracity of statements enjoy:
EVIDENCE ACT 1995 - SECT 59
The hearsay rule--exclusion of hearsay evidence
(1) Evidence of a previous representation made by a person is not admissible to prove the existence of a fact that the person intended to assert by the representation.
(2) Such a fact is in this Part referred to as an
asserted fact .
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to evidence of a representation contained in a certificate or other document given or made under regulations made under an Act other than this Act to the extent to which the regulations provide that the certificate or other document has evidentiary effect.
Note: Specific exceptions to the hearsay rule are as follows:
* evidence relevant for a non‑hearsay purpose (section 60);
* first‑hand hearsay:
-- civil proceedings, if the maker of the representation is unavailable (section 63) or available (section 64);
-- criminal proceedings, if the maker of the representation is unavailable (section 65) or available (section 66);
* business records (section 69);
* tags and labels (section 70);
* telecommunications (section 71);
* contemporaneous statements about a person's health etc. (section 72);
* marriage, family history or family relationships (section 73);
* public or general rights (section 74);
* use of evidence in interlocutory proceedings (section 75);
* admissions (section 81);
* representations about employment or authority (subsection 87(2));
* exceptions to the rule excluding evidence of judgments and convictions (subsection 92(3));
* character of and expert opinion about accused persons (sections 110 and 111).
Other provisions of this Act, or of other laws, may operate as further exceptions.
He's entitled to be considered as innocent until he pleads or is found guilty.
The only reason to stand him down is if his time in remand whilst awaiting bail interefered with his training.
The court has thrown out matters where it has found that the defendant cant get a fair trial.
Maybe thats Birdy's plan B?!
