[Resurrected] Jarryd Hayne, the (forgotten) locked up man

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
This again highlights the difficulty in a jury of 12 coming up with a unanimous decision in these "she said, he said" cases of consent or not.
It's time for the legal profession to re-think such cases and allow a judge to decide the outcome. It's costing the taxpayer a fortune and there is every chance this case will have to return to court.
It's been argued that a jury "always gets the correct decision" yet, co-incidentally, I've just finished a book on the Brett Whiteley forgeries when a jury decided on a guilty verdict yet the judge made it clear he disagreed and within weeks the prosecution decided against fighting an appeal by the accused, so the case was dropped and the decision was overturned.
 
An interaction a friend (who is a Squeels supporter) had with Hayne a few years ago I think sums him up... She ran into Hayne at a Westfields and asked if it was ok to get her photo with him. He said sure grabbed her phone, took a selfie then handed it back & walked off!?!
 
The last couple of weeks has shown how difficult it is to get a conviction in sexual assault cases. I get that we start with a presumption of innocence and demand proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but too often it seems to come down to slut-shaming the victim in order to introduce that doubt. Hayne's story and "dud root" defence didn't seem to add up to me. Guess he'll get to try it out one more time.
 
Getting 12 people to agree that there was "consent" or not is extremely difficult. All the jury has is testimony from those in the room at the time, and these are going to be widely opposing accounts.
I think these cases should revert to a judge only where we'll gain a decision one way or the other, or else we'll continue to have costly stalemate decisions.
 
An interaction a friend (who is a Squeels supporter) had with Hayne a few years ago I think sums him up... She ran into Hayne at a Westfields and asked if it was ok to get her photo with him. He said sure grabbed her phone, took a selfie then handed it back & walked off!?!

Funny, I caught up with a mate on the weekend who said he's seen Hayne twice - once at the airport & once in a cafe up Tweed Heads way & both times he acted completely unapproachable & generally like a d*ckhead.
 
Getting 12 people to agree that there was "consent" or not is extremely difficult. All the jury has is testimony from those in the room at the time, and these are going to be widely opposing accounts.
I think these cases should revert to a judge only where we'll gain a decision one way or the other, or else we'll continue to have costly stalemate decisions.

Disagree, the defendant has the right to choice which form he / she will take.

Yes, I agree that there would be more decisions made, but would they be the right ones. Heard many a judge ask questions of lawyers & barristers that were actually factually wrong questions because they had assumed facts not in existence. In fairness more than 1 person should make a decision after hearing the evidence.
 
When discussing the "consent" conundrum with my wife she came up with a practical, though less than romantic, solution:
"Everyone has a mobile phone so get the verbal consent on video before activities start..."
Sensible, particularly for people in the public spotlight, but will it ever come to this?
 
When discussing the "consent" conundrum with my wife she came up with a practical, though less than romantic, solution:
"Everyone has a mobile phone so get the verbal consent on video before activities start..."
Sensible, particularly for people in the public spotlight, but will it ever come to this?
Yeah but things change, and what if there is unwanted biting?
 
Yeah but things change, and what if there is unwanted biting?
True. And if you believe Hayneible Lick'er's account you'd also have to check the length of one's fingernails, akin to how the refs used to check the sharpness of studs in football boots prior to the start of the match.
 
If you are up to this sort of **** Just record audio on the phone in your pocket. Its not video so while the recording may be a little dodgy there is no way to identify the other party other than the time and date the recording was made. If xxxx then does call Sexual assault and it was consensual you have all the ammo you need to get the case dripped before it even gets going.
They have their phones on them the whole time anyway.
 
He be back in court...



 
He be back in court...



If this had been the average bloke it wouldn't have been reported once let alone twice.
We know all about the allegations. They were detailed in full in the first trial. This is just a repeat.
Sure, report the final verdict, if there is one. But just because this guy is a RL player should not make it newsworthy the second time around.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
6 5 1 59 12
6 5 1 20 12
6 4 2 53 10
6 4 2 30 10
7 4 2 25 9
7 4 3 40 8
7 4 3 24 8
7 4 3 -8 8
7 4 3 -18 8
7 3 3 20 7
7 3 4 31 6
7 3 4 17 6
6 2 4 -31 6
7 3 4 -41 6
7 2 5 -29 4
6 1 5 -102 4
6 0 6 -90 2
Back
Top Bottom