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 | Bulldogs | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 98 | 14 |
2 | Storm | 6 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 70 | 10 |
3 | Raiders | 7 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 46 | 10 |
4 | Warriors | 6 | 4 | 0 | 2 | -18 | 10 |
5 | Broncos | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 54 | 8 |
6 | Sharks | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 41 | 8 |
7 | Dragons | 6 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 20 | 8 |
8 | Rabbitohs | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | -36 | 8 |
9 | Cowboys | 6 | 3 | 0 | 3 | -42 | 8 |
10 | Tigers | 6 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 28 | 6 |
11 | Dolphins | 7 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 28 | 6 |
12 | Sea Eagles | 7 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 20 | 6 |
13 | Titans | 6 | 2 | 0 | 4 | -36 | 6 |
14 | Knights | 6 | 2 | 0 | 4 | -60 | 6 |
15 | Panthers | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -10 | 4 |
16 | Roosters | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 | -80 | 4 |
17 | Eels | 6 | 1 | 0 | 5 | -123 | 2 |