Jack de Belin court case

[The Who]

Before talk about a retrial, I believe a judge can accept a verdict of 11 to 1. This is to take into account what is referred to be a "rogue juror".

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Before talk about a retrial, I believe a judge can accept a verdict of 11 to 1. This is to take into account what is referred to be a "rogue juror".

Interesting , things may have changed but that circumstance I mentioned above was 20 years ago

 

[Ranga]

Jury discharged as they couldn’t reach a verdict. Couldn’t even reach a majority verdict, apparently...

 

[Ranga]

Interesting situation on a number of fronts:

1. Will the DPP go for a retrial? I’d imagine on a matter such as this, the answer is yes.

2. Will the NRL adjust its stand down policy? I’m not sure how long it will take for the case to be re-tried, but JDB could be spending a third year out of the game. I don’t expect the NRL to budge.

3. I believe St George resigned JDB and I assume it was on the basis that he would be available to play. If he isn’t available due to the NRL’s policy, do they terminate the contract? I’d be surprised if they didn’t.

purely speculation from me, though, so take it with a grain of salt...

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1333266940589076483

 

[Mitch]

From a reporter following the trial.

The DPP now has a decision on whether to proceed with another trial. Earliest possible trial in Wollongong District Court is AUGUST NEXT YEAR. Could move a second trial to Sydney. Matter is being mentioned on Wednesday. We'll know more then.

 

[The Wheel]

From a reporter following the trial.

The DPP now has a decision on whether to proceed with another trial. Earliest possible trial in Wollongong District Court is AUGUST NEXT YEAR. Could move a second trial to Sydney. Matter is being mentioned on Wednesday. We'll know more then.

August next year - WTF is the Gong the crime capital of the world. Too many crims not enough courts

 

[globaleagle]

discharged after ONLY 10 hours of deliberations?!?!?!?!

If "law and order" taught me anything is that the Judge usually yells at them to get the hell back into the room and do yer job! Drongos.

 

[Shoe1]

discharged after ONLY 10 hours of deliberations?!?!?!?!

If law and order taught me anything is that the Judge usually yells at them to get the hell back into the room and do ya job! Drongos.

agreed. I've also seen Judges do a very simple summary for juries to help them decide.

By majority verdict here they mean 11 out of 12, not 7 out of 12 btw. So there must be at least 2 that don't agree with the rest. I wonder if there are 10 that think guilty or 10 that think innocent... we'll never know.

There is a lot of extraneous detail in this case - dancing, the hat, the tuk tuk, the third man, the phone call to Angus Chrichton, the police bungles .. but really the jury should only have been looking at consent to the acts. I hope they weren't distracted by the other details.

 

[Southern Eagle]

discharged after ONLY 10 hours of deliberations?!?!?!?!

If law and order taught me anything is that the Judge usually yells at them to get the hell back into the room and do ya job! Drongos.

Would love to know which way the jury was leaning towards (conviction or acquittal)?

 

[The Wheel]

agreed. I've also seen Judges do a very simple summary for juries to help them decide.

By majority verdict here they mean 11 out of 12, not 7 out of 12 btw. So there must be at least 2 that don't agree with the rest. I wonder if there are 10 that think guilty or 10 that think innocent... we'll never know.

There is a lot of extraneous detail in this case - dancing, the hat, the tuk tuk,the third man, the police bungles .. but really the jury should only have been looking at consent to the acts. I hope they weren't distracted by the other details.

The jury must have been split down the middle

 

[Bearfax]

Majority verdicts

Section 55F of the Jury Act now allows for ‘majority verdicts’ in the following circumstances:

• Where a unanimous verdict has not been reached after the jurors have deliberated for a period of at least 8 hours, and the court considers that reasonable time has been given considering the nature and complexity of the case, and
• The court is satisfied after questioning one or more of the jurors on oath that it is unlikely a unanimous verdict will be reached.

‘Majority verdict’ is defined as:

• a verdict agreed to by 11 jurors where the jury consists of 12 persons, or
• a verdict agreed to by 10 jurors where the jury consists of 11 persons.

The judge is not to advise the jury of its ability to return a majority verdict before determining that a unanimous verdict is unlikely to be reached.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

What a **** up!!

Can you imagine the poor girl having to go through the whole thing AGAIN!!

 

[Brisbane Tragic]

What a **** up!!

Can you imagine the poor girl having to go through the whole thing AGAIN!!

Can't see their being another trial - I am gathering that the jury was split and if so why would they seek another trial. If a guilty verdict was close then they would think the prospects of an outcome at another trial was pretty good but not if the jury is close to evenly spit.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Can't see their being another trial - I am gathering that the jury was split and if so why would they seek another trial. If a guilty verdict was close then they would think the prospects of an outcome at another trieal was pretty good but not if the juty is close to evenly spit.

Good point he may in fact get off on that basis , but who knows

 

[Brisbane Tragic]

Good point he may in fact get off on that basis , but who knows

Just depends Mark if it is close maybe 9 3 they would probably go again but if it was anything else and especially if it is 7/5 or split down the middle - the chances of another jury thinking differently would be slim.... unless they think that they can outmanouvre the defence in a new trial seeing they have seen their evidence and defence strategy and believe they can attack it very differently and win.

 

[The better Robbo]

So ... if it is a retrial ... how long before that happens ??

It said August

 

[Leader of the Flock]

From the SMH

Jack de Belin faces third year out after NRL refuses to lift ban despite hung jury

The jury in the trial of Dragons star Jack de Belin and his co-accused Callan Sinclair has been unable to reach a verdict after nine hours of deliberations.

www.smh.com.au

From the Telegraph

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/t...n/news-story/b3aef995d4ddce4e754fcd7a2e46f6fc

 

[manlyfan76]

Have they said how many jurors were dragons fans?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Just depends Mark if it is close maybe 9 3 they would probably go again but if it was anything else and especially if it is 7/5 or split down the middle - the chances of another jury thinking differently would be slim.... unless they think that they can outmanouvre the defence in a new trial seeing they have seen their evidence and defence strategy and believe they can attack it very differently and win.

No-one knows how they were split except the jury members themselves. The DPP will consider all aspects of how the case played out, as well as the attitude of the complainant, in making a decision about a re-trial.