News Jarryd Hayne sexual assault trials

[I Bleed Maroon]

Enjoy prison, Haynebal

 

[marshall stalin]

Thanks..

I meant the state government but if this is the standard of DPP we get…

….. perhaps the dpp position should be elected.

A third go at him is entirely unconscionable and could result in yet another miscarriage of justice.

How many millions of tax payers dollars is being wasted on this while women’s refuges are being closed down and peoples homes are under water.

Maybe f**king Putin is right, maybe the west is full of would-be nazis?

I never thought I’d see the day when that tosser Hayne would become a unwitting martyr, but here he is.

That is my honest opinion.

Maybe the whole of the criminal west should be de-nazified and de-militarized

 

[mxlegend99]

If it took 5 days for a jury to fully agree on a verdict and for the judge pressure them to come to a unanimous decision because they were undecided i feel like that's reasonable doubt right there.

Hopefully Hayne is actually guilty. Hopefully the jury is correct.

But one hung jury. Another taking 5 days and then having the judge pressure them to agree IMO feels like there's reasonable doubt.

But I've always felt his guilt or innocence was impossible to prove. Only two people who can no without doubt are the two that have reason to twist the truth to sell their story. Or if there's some actual damning evidence that wasn't leaked hopefully it eventually is.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Maybe the whole of the criminal west should be de-nazified and de-militarized

Can start the round up at the Penrith Panthers.

 

[nick87]

Read properly next time before you have a cry. No one directly called a specific jury dumb, just that it's possible to sometimes get a dumb or bias jury hence why wrongful convictions DO occur in our legal system. That you take a critique of our legal system as a whole and apply it to a single case and then have a big cry is your own doing.

Lastly, police investigated his sexual assault case in the USA for 6 months and found that he had no case to answer.




Translation of your facts:
- One of the juries who had access to these mountains of evidence that we were not privy to and had been attending court "day in and day out" contained jurors who believed Hayne was not guilty.
- The "technicality" you refer to was a jury being given "profoundly wrong" legal directions.
- The third jury could not reach a verdict for 5 days which means that jurors on this jury, at least initially, also did not believe beyond reasonable doubt that Hayne was guilty.

it means the jury was deadlocked. And those few who were on the side of not sure were not so convinced of his innocence that they could not be persuaded. This is a very common and routine event in the justice system. Happens all the time. The ability for juries to be deadlocked and deliberate and ultimately come to a verdict they agree on is very much the system
Framing it as some sign that a miscarriage has occurred is asinine

He’s had his day in court… three of them in fact. And two of those juries have felt the evidence met the criteria to convict beyond all reasonable doubt… yes, innocent people are found guilty but given the extremely low conviction rates for sexual offences and how hard it is to actually clear the “beyond reasonable doubt” bar for these cases… the fact two juries have seen fit to find this man guilty… well anyone still giving him the BOTD is a bit like Hayne. An absolute piece of shit.

 

[the phantom menace]

My thoughts - from deep in the Parra forum.

So now we know the initial failure to reach a verdict fell closer to the majority thinking Hayne was guilty, and maybe between two and five jurors needing the judge's clarification that ignorance (of the need for consent?) is no excuse.

Unanimously guilty as charged, for the second time. And the convicted *sexual assaulter* fool is still deluded that he is "100% innocent" and talking up another appeal... when the last one only got up on a technicality.

Enjoy your jail term Jarryd, you absolute selfish arrogant uncaring merkin of human being - who despite on field talent must now go down as a stain on our club's jersey and history.

We're only giving the merkin any attention at all because he used to be a decent footy player 15 years ago - otherwise he's just a (twice proven/convicted) shit stain on any of our shoes.

 

[the phantom menace]

Hayne's only got 2 years 11 months of the original sentence still to serve, unless the sentence length gets altered (in either direction) on Thursday.

Hope he brings his Hillsong bible with him to sentencing so he can celebrate Good Friday in the slammer, like the good christian (hypocrite) he obviously is...

 

[Apey]

it means the jury was deadlocked. And those few who were on the side of not sure were not so convinced of his innocence that they could not be persuaded. This is a very common and routine event in the justice system. Happens all the time. The ability for juries to be deadlocked and deliberate and ultimately come to a verdict they agree on is very much the system
Framing it as some sign that a miscarriage has occurred is asinine

He’s had his day in court… three of them in fact. And two of those juries have felt the evidence met the criteria to convict beyond all reasonable doubt… yes, innocent people are found guilty but given the extremely low conviction rates for sexual offences and how hard it is to actually clear the “beyond reasonable doubt” bar for these cases… the fact two juries have seen fit to find this man guilty… well anyone still giving him the BOTD is a bit like Hayne. An absolute piece of shit.

haha reckon anyone would give a f**k about trying to defend him if he wasn't a footy player they liked at some point?

 

[nick87]

haha reckon anyone would give a f**k about trying to defend him if he wasn't a footy player they liked at some point?

I actually think they would. Like I’m sure there are some Parra/NSW super fans who try and defend him because of his footy but mostly I think the people trying to defend him are the same merkins who always want to give men the BOTD, and some how think women are out there on masse putting themselves through all kinds of bullshit just to put poor innocent men behind bars

real blokes advice types

 

[fourplay]

it means the jury was deadlocked. And those few who were on the side of not sure were not so convinced of his innocence that they could not be persuaded. This is a very common and routine event in the justice system. Happens all the time. The ability for juries to be deadlocked and deliberate and ultimately come to a verdict they agree on is very much the system
Framing it as some sign that a miscarriage has occurred is asinine

He’s had his day in court… three of them in fact. And two of those juries have felt the evidence met the criteria to convict beyond all reasonable doubt… yes, innocent people are found guilty but given the extremely low conviction rates for sexual offences and how hard it is to actually clear the “beyond reasonable doubt” bar for these cases… the fact two juries have seen fit to find this man guilty… well anyone still giving him the BOTD is a bit like Hayne. An absolute piece of shit.

Yeah and one of the juries couldn't come to an agreement that the evidence met the criteria to convict. Seems like there must have been quite a bit of doubt for them there.

Do you also think that the jurors, who sat through weeks of evidence that we weren't privy to, and decided that he was not guilty are "absolute pieces of shit" too for giving him benefit of the doubt?

 

[nick87]

Yeah and one of the juries couldn't come to an agreement that the evidence met the criteria to convict. Seems like there must have been quite a bit of doubt for them there.

Do you think that the jurors, who sat through weeks of evidence that we weren't privy to, and decided that he was not guilty are "absolute pieces of shit" too for giving him benefit of the doubt?

No.
Quite specifically I think people who give him the BOTD after THREE jury trials. Trials of a kind which are notoriously hard to convict on. In which two found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Those are the pieces of shit

and to be more pointed. Im talking about you. You are one of the aforementioned pieces of shit. I hope this helps.

 

[King hit]

I actually think they would. Like I’m sure there are some Parra/NSW super fans who try and defend him because of his footy but mostly I think the people trying to defend him are the same merkins who always want to give men the BOTD, and some how think women are out there on masse putting themselves through all kinds of bullshit just to put poor innocent men behind bars

real blokes advice types

Hayne was one of my favourite players back in the day and I absolutely do not support anyone who is convicted of sexual abuse. And this is coming from someone who can be skeptical of these cases (I’ll never forget Brett Stewart).

 

[nick87]

The BOTD belongs to those who are awaiting their day in court. Innocence until proven guilty

Hayne has now been found guilty. He is no longer entitled to any presumption of anything beyond a verdict that was handed down by a jury (2 of 3 in fact) of his peers

And that is he has been found guilty.
Anyone willing to extend him the BOTD at this point… well that’s quite a statement about you and what you stand for. And I’ll judge you accordingly

 

[fourplay]

No.
Quite specifically I think people who give him the BOTD after THREE jury trials. Trials of a kind which are notoriously hard to convict on. In which two found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Those are the pieces of shit

and to be more pointed. Im talking about you. You are one of the aforementioned pieces of shit. I hope this helps.

Alright, so you claim that anyone who gives Hayne the benefit of the doubt is a piece of shit, but then say people who sat inside the court room and listened to weeks of evidence and decided that Hayne was not guilty are not pieces of shit. Real sound logic. Best you lay off the lead crayons for a while.

 

[marshall stalin]

Hayne's only got 2 years 11 months of the original sentence still to serve, unless the sentence length gets altered (in either direction) on Thursday.

Hope he brings his Hillsong bible with him to sentencing so he can celebrate Good Friday in the slammer, like the good christian (hypocrite) he obviously is...

Be interesting then what the sentencing will be in that case with the time already served - He will be appealing of course - any chance he may get bail pending the appeal?

He was released on bail from Prison in Feb 2022 and this Third Trial was over a year later

Hayne was in May sentenced to five years and nine months behind bars – with a non-parole period of three years and eight months and has served 9 months as you allude to - 2 years and 11 months to serve.

It is fairly unusual for a defendant to face a third trial over allegations by one complainant in circumstances where many hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars have been spent to prosecute the case, and one wonders whether the prosecution is consistent with DPP guidelines to expend resources only in circumstances where this is in the public interest.

Jarryd Hayne Faces Third Trial Over Sexual Assault Allegation

The former two-time NRL player of the year is before the District Court of New South Wales to face a third jury trial over the same allegation.

www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au

Is it Fair for a Defendant to Face a Third Criminal Trial?

The community is polarised over whether Jarryd Hayne should face yet another sexual assault trial.

www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au

 

[SLRBRONCOS]

Looks like he took the Elizabeth Holmes route and got pregnant before the trial.

Consent is sexy. Hayne is scum.

 

[marshall stalin]

The BOTD belongs to those who are awaiting their day in court. Innocence until proven guilty

Hayne has now been found guilty. He is no longer entitled to any presumption of anything beyond a verdict that was handed down by a jury (2 of 3 in fact) of his peers

And that is he has been found guilty.
Anyone willing to extend him the BOTD at this point… well that’s quite a statement about you and what you stand for. And I’ll judge you accordingly

Hayne has a right of appeal though still so it's not set in stone his guilt or otherwise as yet until this appeal is heard and the decision is handed down.

 

[Marshall_magic]

haha reckon anyone would give a f**k about trying to defend him if he wasn't a footy player they liked at some point?

I genuinely believe where there is ambiguity people will believe what is most convenient. I feel like for most footy fans it’s more convenient for Hayne to be not guilty and it to all be a big lie.

another take I’ve heard is that for people who are incredible in one area, they make up for it by lacking in another. With the footy boys people assume it’s intelligence that they lack, but it could just as easily be social skills. It’s not a shock to me that someone who excels in the sporting world could be an absolute prick to deal with.

 

[the phantom menace]

Be interesting then what the sentencing will be in that case with the time already served - He will be appealing of course - any chance he may get bail pending the appeal?

He was released on bail from Prison in Feb 2022 and this Third Trial was over a year later

Hayne was in May sentenced to five years and nine months behind bars – with a non-parole period of three years and eight months and has served 9 months as you allude to - 2 years and 11 months to serve.

It is fairly unusual for a defendant to face a third trial over allegations by one complainant in circumstances where many hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars have been spent to prosecute the case, and one wonders whether the prosecution is consistent with DPP guidelines to expend resources only in circumstances where this is in the public interest.

Jarryd Hayne Faces Third Trial Over Sexual Assault Allegation

The former two-time NRL player of the year is before the District Court of New South Wales to face a third jury trial over the same allegation.

www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au

Is it Fair for a Defendant to Face a Third Criminal Trial?

The community is polarised over whether Jarryd Hayne should face yet another sexual assault trial.

www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au

I wouldn't expect a chance in sentence, as there really was no new evidence and this trial was only occurring because Hayne's previous appeal got up on two grounds (technicailities) out of four sought. It's hard to see what further grounds his team might use to appeal now, and his talk of an appeal might just be courthouse step bluster as he prepares to go back to Cowra?

I also wouldn't expect him to get bail subject to a further (hypothetical) appeal - I think his last appeal was lodged while he was serving time, and he was only free between that appeal and this trial. I think he knows he's heading back in custody folllowing Thursday's hearing, and is enjoying his last day of freedom for a while tomorrow.

I fel sorry for his kid and his wife.

 

[marshall stalin]

It always has been a matter of which version of events people believed. The "evidence" fits both stories.

IMO there's just too many things that at the very least provide reasonable doubt.

-She complained that he didn't stay longer after he had already left. This is the biggest one for me. I just can't see why any victim would want the person that supposedly abused them to hang around afterwards.

-Her mother being in the next room and she didn't call out for help. Also it seems a bit risky anyone would rape someone with a potential witness so close also. Not to see that she couldn't have been scared to call for help and he wasn't crazy enough he didn't care. But if she was scared to call for help, why did she want him hanging around afterwards?

-Thousands of messages sent prior where she was trying to make it a sexual relationship. This doesn't mean she can't change her mind obviously. But did she change her mind when she claims she did? or after regretting the encounter that she was willingly participating in and him just bailing on her?

I don't know what happened. I don't think we ever will know for sure. But there's more than enough doubt in my mind that you can't send him away for it. Even though there's reason to doubt his innocence also. It's not up to him to prove his innocence beyond a reasonable doubt. It's up to them to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

It just seems ass backwards that in this case he has been presumed guilty even by the judge in the second trial and it has been on him to prove he is definitely innocent rather than the opposite. I just hope if he is found guilty again and sent away that he actually was guilty. But I think it's scary how easily accusations that haven't even been proven can be believed so quickly and a person can be screwed if they can't prove they're a lie.

Basically it came down to her word against his in the end as there were no witnesses to what was said.

The taxi was the catalyst in this though one has to say as it changed everything.