Hayne~NFL~RU~Tits~Eels~Dad~Jailed~Mistrial~Jailed 5yrs~Retrial~Jailed~Appeal~Quashed-Sued

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Big day for everyone's favourite ex-Eel star...

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/former-nrl-star-jarryd-hayne-to-face-third-trial-over-2018-sexual-assault-allegations/news-story/cddd82d709e90fe69dc3e9f6fd06ba7b

And so we get the second hand court reports.

 

[blue bags]

Same case. But 3RD time in court

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Same case. But 3RD time in court

Yeah, they won’t let go and the defence can’t seem to knock them out.

I imagine all legal avenues to set aside and extinguish this prosecution have been exhausted.

At first glance, where I was the decision maker, I’d need some pretty compelling legal argument as to why a third crack is just and fair on the accused. But we presume that’s done.

The crown win and she has a huge civil case against Haynesy I guess -depending on her circumstances.

Given the lawyers used, jury and facilities, I’d expect little change from $35k a day.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

So Haynesy and the government are willing to spend maybe close to a million dollars to determine the matter.

 

[hindy111]

So Haynesy and the government are willing to spend maybe close to a million dollars to determine the matter.

Is he going to jail?

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Is he going to jail?

The jury will determine his guilt or innocence and then if he’s found guilty, I suppose so, although he should get credit for time served.

People are a bit concerned that the crown gets a third go at him. In my life experience, I can’t point to any other examples.

If they lose, I think the Director of Public Prosecutions should consider resigning.

 

[Twizzle]

it is odd, most I've ever seen prior is 2

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The jury will determine his guilt or innocence and then if he’s found guilty, I suppose so, although he should get credit for time served.

People are a bit concerned that the crown gets a third go at him. In my life experience, I can’t point to any other examples.

If they lose, I think the Director of Public Prosecutions should consider resigning.

*re-signing

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Its a bit complex to draw a conclusion unless we are there at the trial and can consider the evidence the jury is provided with.

We usually get the worst click bait headlines, not an assessment of the credit and credibility of the witnesses. Not the run or comparison of exhibit evidence.

Some liars too, they can seem truthful in court and other truthful people, they can seem like liars.

We’ve all met people, we get to know them and think one thing and our initial views change.

We know he’s stupid for entering into the liaison, but that doesn’t make him guilty.

The idea of juries is to get judged by your peers.

One can dislike it, but what do we replace it with?

 

[the phantom menace]

The jury in the first trial couldn't reach an agreed verdict. That didn't mean not guilty, but it meant the trial needed to run again (a second time).

The second trial's verdict was only quashed on appeal due to two technicalities, namely

1. That the judge’s directions to the jury were “flawed” – that is, that the judge in the trial did not give the jury the correct guidance on how to apply the law to the evidence; and
2. That text messages from the complainant with another person should have been admitted into evidence.

This does not equal not guilty, it just means the trial was deemed flawed and so needs to go again (a third time). Of note, two grounds of Hayne's appeal were unsuccessful, these being:

1. The complainant's evidence was so inconsistent that it was unreasonable for the jury to find Hayne guilty; and
2. That it was an error to allow the jury to view part of the complainant’s recorded evidence from the first trial.

The first of those findings - essentially that it was not unreasonable for the jury to find Hayne guilty - is probably the one Hayne's team should be most worried about - and why this third trial is being pursued.

Take nothing for granted...

(A source re the four appeal findings: https://fleurbitconlegal.com/consent-in-sexual-assault-trials-jaryd-hayne-case-explainer/ - though there are probably more/others)

 

[the phantom menace]

Hopefully he's removed the Ed Sheeran version of Wonderwall from his list of "go to" moves - Hayne's karaoke performance not getting a good review here:

Taxi and Ed Sheeran song ‘shifted’ woman’s mind about sex with Hayne, jury told

Former NRL player Jarryd Hayne is alleged to have sexually assaulted a woman, leaving her bleeding, a court has heard.

www.smh.com.au

Any possibility of consensual sex between a woman and former NRL player Jarryd Hayne evaporated with the presence of a waiting taxi outside her house in Newcastle and the awkwardness of him singing along to Ed Sheeran, a court has heard.

- - -

Inside, they lay down on the bed and Hayne asked for a laptop and sang along to Ed Sheeran’s version of Oasis’ Wonderwall.

“[She] found the whole singing along to songs things to be quite awkward,” Sfinas said.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

The jury in the first trial couldn't reach an agreed verdict. That didn't mean not guilty, but it meant the trial needed to run again (a second time).

The second trial's verdict was only quashed on appeal due to two technicalities, namely

1. That the judge’s directions to the jury were “flawed” – that is, that the judge in the trial did not give the jury the correct guidance on how to apply the law to the evidence; and
2. That text messages from the complainant with another person should have been admitted into evidence.

This does not equal not guilty, it just means the trial was deemed flawed and so needs to go again (a third time). Of note, two grounds of Hayne's appeal were unsuccessful, these being:

1. The complainant's evidence was so inconsistent that it was unreasonable for the jury to find Hayne guilty; and
2. That it was an error to allow the jury to view part of the complainant’s recorded evidence from the first trial.

The first of those findings - essentially that it was not unreasonable for the jury to find Hayne guilty - is probably the one Hayne's team should be most worried about - and why this third trial is being pursued.

Take nothing for granted...

(A source re the four appeal findings: https://fleurbitconlegal.com/consent-in-sexual-assault-trials-jaryd-hayne-case-explainer/ - though there are probably more/others)

Thank you for the refresher, much appreciated.

Edited…

His Honour this time around is an esteemed ex defence counsel while Haynes Counsel was one of the states most effective prosecutors-one of the sharpest tools in the shed.

I’d be surprised if she couldn’t run the prosecutors case better than they could.

That doesn’t equate to an outcome, but it’s like starting with Munster.

No expense spared.

I wish we all had the opportunity to defend ourselves to such a high standard. That is a major problem with our justice system and detracts from its aims and objectives.

 

[Gary Gutful]

The jury in the first trial couldn't reach an agreed verdict. That didn't mean not guilty, but it meant the trial needed to run again (a second time).

The second trial's verdict was only quashed on appeal due to two technicalities, namely

1. That the judge’s directions to the jury were “flawed” – that is, that the judge in the trial did not give the jury the correct guidance on how to apply the law to the evidence; and
2. That text messages from the complainant with another person should have been admitted into evidence.

This does not equal not guilty, it just means the trial was deemed flawed and so needs to go again (a third time). Of note, two grounds of Hayne's appeal were unsuccessful, these being:

1. The complainant's evidence was so inconsistent that it was unreasonable for the jury to find Hayne guilty; and
2. That it was an error to allow the jury to view part of the complainant’s recorded evidence from the first trial.

The first of those findings - essentially that it was not unreasonable for the jury to find Hayne guilty - is probably the one Hayne's team should be most worried about - and why this third trial is being pursued.

Take nothing for granted...

(A source re the four appeal findings: https://fleurbitconlegal.com/consent-in-sexual-assault-trials-jaryd-hayne-case-explainer/ - though there are probably more/others)

Take note @Legal Eel. This is how you do legal shit.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Take note @Legal Eel. This is how you do legal shit.

@the phantom menace = high quality posting.

They’d make Tpm a mod on our west tigers forum.

 

[Avenger]

 

[JokerEel]

Did he have a stroke

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

The Gucci suit and matching tie won’t impress the jury.

Jdb couldn’t get a shirt that fitted around his neck.

 

[Avenger]

The biggest fall from grace in Rugby League history. At his best he was the best player I have ever seen. He is League's version of Ben Cousins.

#tragic

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

The biggest fall from grace in Rugby League history. At his best he was the best player I have ever seen. He is League's version of Ben Cousins.

#tragic

#dumb.

If he wanted a cuddle that badly, he had his partner or he could have got a lady of the night.

In his drunken haze, he makes his way to the young lady’s place, thinks he some kind of minstrel wooing a maiden and then…the taxi driver gets frustrated waiting.

Amone wipes the floor with Haynsey on the tragic stakes. His marquee career had barely started.

 

[Incorrect]

Did he have a stroke

No, sounds like it was more of a lick and then a bite....