The Who
Journey Man
That's not such a silly thought, and it may be why a future trial could be held in Sydney.Have they said how many jurors were dragons fans?
That's not such a silly thought, and it may be why a future trial could be held in Sydney.Have they said how many jurors were dragons fans?
No dragons fans in Sydney, oh waitThat's not such a silly thought, and it may be why a future trial could be held in Sydney.
That's not what happened.
I don’t think so. If not unanimous the judge can ask if they can get to 11-1. Obviously they couldn’t. So at least 2 were not agreeing with the rest.So, if the first verdict came back as 11-1 & the judge sent them back for further deliberation, the second verdict must have been 10-2 (or any other variable other than 11-1), as we know from the article @Bearfax posted the judge could call 11-1 as a majority verdict, so at least 1 juror must have changed their decision.
There is no verdict so the question hasn’t been answered.So did they do it or not?
I don’t think so. If not unanimous the judge can ask if they can get to 11-1. Obviously they couldn’t. So at least 2 were not agreeing with the rest.
Have it at Penrith or Parramatta court and see how they goNo dragons fans in Sydney, oh wait
That's not such a silly thought, and it may be why a future trial could be held in Sydney.
So did they do it or not?
lol I never said how they were split my contribution here was based on ifs. But they were split lol. I will just be surprised it it proceeds to another trial... just my view.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.
A judge never asks the foreperson what the split is, only 'have you arrived at a verdict?' You may have misheard some news report (or more likely, correctly heard some incorrect news report!)what I thought was an announcement that the first verdict returned was 11-1
A judge never asks the foreperson what the split is, only 'have you arrived at a verdict?' You may have misheard some news report (or more likely, correctly heard some incorrect news report!)
I was just commenting on you speculating that the DPP decision for a new trial might depend on what the jury split was. But the DPP wouldn't know the split, no-one does. That's all I meant.lol I never said how they were split my contribution here was based on ifs. But they were split lol. I will just be surprised it it proceeds to another trial... just my view.
Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |