Rex said:What you're saying Volley is that they charge based on their preconceptions of the player, not on the incident itself.
If so the players like Matai get hit with a loading twice, maybe three times if it influences an innocent/guilty verdict in any way.
Garts said:Rex said:What you're saying Volley is that they charge based on their preconceptions of the player, not on the incident itself.
If so the players like Matai get hit with a loading twice, maybe three times if it influences an innocent/guilty verdict in any way.
If some is continually charged with drink driving do you think they should be penalised more severely than a first time offender?
Rex said:What you're saying Volley is that they charge based on their preconceptions of the player, not on the incident itself.
If so the players like Matai get hit with a loading twice, maybe three times if it influences an innocent/guilty verdict in any way.
The Eagle said:Garts said:Rex said:What you're saying Volley is that they charge based on their preconceptions of the player, not on the incident itself.
If so the players like Matai get hit with a loading twice, maybe three times if it influences an innocent/guilty verdict in any way.
If some is continually charged with drink driving do you think they should be penalised more severely than a first time offender?
I thought common law said a man shouldn't have evidence from his previous similar offenses weighed against him with new charges
Volley said:Rex said:What you're saying Volley is that they charge based on their preconceptions of the player, not on the incident itself.
If so the players like Matai get hit with a loading twice, maybe three times if it influences an innocent/guilty verdict in any way.
Hi Rex, Garts answered for me.
I think Matai would get the same charge, but loading would increase his punishment.
The Eagle said:Garts said:Rex said:What you're saying Volley is that they charge based on their preconceptions of the player, not on the incident itself.
If so the players like Matai get hit with a loading twice, maybe three times if it influences an innocent/guilty verdict in any way.
If some is continually charged with drink driving do you think they should be penalised more severely than a first time offender?
I thought common law said a man shouldn't have evidence from his previous similar offenses weighed against him with new charges
As fro said, guilt from prior offences can't be used to prove guilt of a new charge, but it can be used in sentencing.
Team | P | W | D | L | PD | Pts | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Raiders | 17 | 14 | 0 | 3 | 108 | 32 |
2 | Storm | 16 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 220 | 30 |
3 | Bulldogs | 16 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 96 | 30 |
4 | Warriors | 16 | 11 | 0 | 5 | 31 | 28 |
5 | Broncos | 17 | 10 | 0 | 7 | 80 | 24 |
6 | Panthers | 16 | 8 | 1 | 7 | 25 | 23 |
7 | Sea Eagles | 16 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 58 | 22 |
8 | Roosters | 16 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 21 | 22 |
9 | Sharks | 17 | 9 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 22 |
10 | Dolphins | 17 | 8 | 0 | 9 | 150 | 20 |
11 | Dragons | 16 | 6 | 0 | 10 | -56 | 18 |
12 | Cowboys | 17 | 6 | 1 | 10 | -144 | 17 |
13 | Knights | 17 | 6 | 0 | 11 | -85 | 16 |
14 | Tigers | 17 | 6 | 0 | 11 | -102 | 16 |
15 | Eels | 16 | 5 | 0 | 11 | -125 | 16 |
16 | Rabbitohs | 17 | 6 | 0 | 11 | -129 | 16 |
17 | Titans | 16 | 4 | 0 | 12 | -156 | 14 |