Manase Fainu - Discussion

  • 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.
  • We have been getting regular requests for users who have been locked out of their accounts because they have changed email adresses over the lifetime of their accounts. Please make sure the email address under your account is your current and correct email address in order to avoid this in the future. You can set your email address at https://silvertails.net/account/account-details
  • Wwe are currently experience some server issues which I am working through and hoping to resolve soon, Please bare with me whilst I work through making some changes and possible intermittent outages.
  • Apologies all our server was runing rogue. I managed to get us back to a point from 2:45 today though there is an attachment issue i will fix shortly. Things should be smooth now though

Dan

Kim Jong Dan
Staff member
Administrator
Tipping Member
I am posting this as a new thread to hopefully have it kept clean of racism and off topic chat.

As it currently stands Manase Fainu has been found guilty of the crime he was tried for, that is the current fact. There may be an appeal, I am not clear on that yet. If an appeal is put forward, he he is then found not guilty then he is innocent of the crime.

Keep that in mind when contributing here. Do not post racist and off topic posts.

This thread may be removed, as its relation to Rugby League is fragile.
 

Damien2812

Bencher
I am posting this as a new thread to hopefully have it kept clean of racism and off topic chat.

As it currently stands Manase Fainu has been found guilty of the crime he was tried for, that is the current fact. There may be an appeal, I am not clear on that yet. If an appeal is put forward, he he is then found not guilty then he is innocent of the crime.

Keep that in mind when contributing here. Do not post racist and off topic posts.

This thread may be removed, as its relation to Rugby League is fragile.
Greatly said. Let the process run its course but the club needs to move on from this and build their roster for next season. 👍
 

bob dylan

First Grader
Premium Member
Tipping Member
I was reading some posters said the guilty party had a look of bewilderment on his face, totally probably shocked at the verdict, as he left court.

Having just seen this in real life and with the same result it stuns everyone involved with the prisoner because. they are told, and believe if they pay for the best defence money can afford the problems will go likely away.

Then the representative, in this case the QC, tells them continually they will be found not guilty. Its all part of the game. After all who is going to cough up $5-10K a day on someone who tells you the likely scenario is you are going to jail for many years.

People remember this is Australia not Indonesia, justice will be done.

Here is my advise to anyone who ends up in this type of predicament. If you are tough enough to be in a gang, and tough enough to hurt someone, be tough enough to admit your crime, and be tough enough to do the time.

The sentence will be reduced by 25% with a guilty plea. The judge will most likely take further positive actions by not wasting the courts time and tax payers money.

Anyone thought about the 12 jurors who have had to shelve their lives for 3 weeks?.
 

The Who

Journey Man
This paragraph is from a report from Channel Nine (posted in the now deleted forum item), and it has me confused:
The jurors were told Fainu and his friend Uona Faingaa, known as "Big Buck", were involved in the dancefloor fight and ushered outside by Levi, who told them not to fight on church grounds.
I have read reports that Fainu didn't attend the dance. Can anyone clarify the facts? If my understanding is correct then it shows how sloppy the reporting of this case has been.
 

47MVEagle

Bencher
This paragraph is from a report from Channel Nine (posted in the now deleted forum item), and it has me confused:
The jurors were told Fainu and his friend Uona Faingaa, known as "Big Buck", were involved in the dancefloor fight and ushered outside by Levi, who told them not to fight on church grounds.
I have read reports that Fainu didn't attend the dance. Can anyone clarify the facts? If my understanding is correct then it shows how sloppy the reporting of this case has been.
Fainu's testimony confirms he was present at the dance when the dancefloor altercation occurred.
 

StuBoot

Bencher
I was reading some posters said the guilty party had a look of bewilderment on his face, totally probably shocked at the verdict, as he left court.

Having just seen this in real life and with the same result it stuns everyone involved with the prisoner because. they are told, and believe if they pay for the best defence money can afford the problems will go likely away.

Then the representative, in this case the QC, tells them continually they will be found not guilty. Its all part of the game. After all who is going to cough up $5-10K a day on someone who tells you the likely scenario is you are going to jail for many years.

People remember this is Australia not Indonesia, justice will be done.

Here is my advise to anyone who ends up in this type of predicament. If you are tough enough to be in a gang, and tough enough to hurt someone, be tough enough to admit your crime, and be tough enough to do the time.

The sentence will be reduced by 25% with a guilty plea. The judge will most likely take further positive actions by not wasting the courts time and tax payers money.

Anyone thought about the 12 jurors who have had to shelve their lives for 3 weeks?.
 

Pete the Eagle

Reserve Grader
This is just a classic example of stupidity , he should never have been there at all , he's young and dumb but some of the things he said , come on , the towel around his head because of a headache ??? also he said it was easier to climb the fence than go back through the gates to get back into the function , right there , come on , his arms in a sling .
Best result is Manly can cut him loose and move on .
 

StuBoot

Bencher
This is just a classic example of stupidity , he should never have been there at all , he's young and dumb but some of the things he said , come on , the towel around his head because of a headache ??? also he said it was easier to climb the fence than go back through the gates to get back into the function , right there , come on , his arms in a sling .
Best result is Manly can cut him loose and move on .
Yep,
Identifiable by his arm in a sling - that he took off before coming back over the fence - but I'll put a white towel on my head just to double down.
 

Budgie

In for the long haul.
2016 Tipping Competitor
Tipping Member
This is just a classic example of stupidity , he should never have been there at all , he's young and dumb but some of the things he said , come on , the towel around his head because of a headache ??? also he said it was easier to climb the fence than go back through the gates to get back into the function , right there , come on , his arms in a sling .
Best result is Manly can cut him loose and move on .
Sure but none of this produces a knife or a credible witness or addresses a change in evidence from the initial witness statements.
 

Ron E. Gibbs

First Grader
I reckon there's no doubt he'll get off on appeal.
I'm not sure about that, BE. If, as has been reported, the appeal is on the basis of a "perverse verdict", that will mean the appellate court would have to accept that that either the jury failed to follow the judge's instructions (and at this stage we don't know how the judge instructed the jury) or that the jury reached a verdict that, on the evidence, no reasonable person could have reached. That can be hard to prove at the best of times, but is harder to prove when the jury was unanimous.

Given the sparse reporting on the case, it's hard to know exactly what happened, but the obvious conclusion is that the jury believed the prosecution's witness and didn't believe Manase. His reported explanations for jumping the fence and wearing the towel on his head were fanciful, so the jury may have simply decided that if he lied about that, he was probably lying about everything else. His testimony was likely the deciding factor in the verdict.
 

Budgie

In for the long haul.
2016 Tipping Competitor
Tipping Member
I'm not sure about that, BE. If, as has been reported, the appeal is on the basis of a "perverse verdict", that will mean the appellate court would have to accept that that either the jury failed to follow the judge's instructions (and at this stage we don't know how the judge instructed the jury) or that the jury reached a verdict that, on the evidence, no reasonable person could have reached. That can be hard to prove at the best of times, but is harder to prove when the jury was unanimous.

Given the sparse reporting on the case, it's hard to know exactly what happened, but the obvious conclusion is that the jury believed the prosecution's witness and didn't believe Manase. His reported explanations for jumping the fence and wearing the towel on his head were fanciful, so the jury may have simply decided that if he lied about that, he was probably lying about everything else. His testimony was likely the deciding factor in the verdict.
Agree that his testimony was ridiculous but I was thinking that the appeal probably relates to the judge's instructions given how quickly the appeal was determined. Who knows?
 

mave

First Grader
Premium Member
Tipping Member
Oh God, just let this thing be over and free our club from this paralysis.

We should be free now.

Surely we, as a club, are not hanging around waiting for the outcome of an appeal....although, knowing the club, we probably are.
 

Eagles4Life

Bencher
Premium Member
Tipping Member
Manase did himself no favors with his actions (and the evidence he provided) on the night leading up to the actual stabbing. He admitted he was there. He further admitted that he was involved in the initial scuffle on the dancefloor. He then admitted that he drove the vehicle back to the location, after being ejected from the venue. He then attempted to disguise his appearance, admitted to be being first over the fence, in what was now arguably a joint criminal enterprise. He then lied (very badly) about the towel disguise and the reason for jumping the fence back into a premises he had just been ejected from by security. This testimony, as it has been reported, was extremely unhelpful to his defence. At this stage his own words had zero credibility as far as the jury was concerned. I cannot understand how any of the above was allowed to be included by his defence team? There is obviously a lot more to the incident that was even more prejudicial i.e no statements included from the other four persons who accompanied him on the night.
He might win on appeal but it clearly won't be based on his testimony this time around.
 

davohan123

First Grader
Premium Member
Tipping Member
I am posting this as a new thread to hopefully have it kept clean of racism and off topic chat.

As it currently stands Manase Fainu has been found guilty of the crime he was tried for, that is the current fact. There may be an appeal, I am not clear on that yet. If an appeal is put forward, he he is then found not guilty then he is innocent of the crime.

Keep that in mind when contributing here. Do not post racist and off topic posts.

This thread may be removed, as its relation to Rugby League is fragile.
Well said
 
Team P W L PD Pts
11 9 2 82 20
11 8 3 112 18
11 8 3 75 18
10 7 3 69 16
12 7 5 135 14
11 7 4 59 14
11 6 5 -9 14
11 6 5 -38 14
12 6 5 36 13
11 5 6 47 12
12 6 6 2 12
11 5 6 -88 12
11 4 6 -7 9
11 3 8 -119 8
10 2 8 -91 6
11 2 9 -95 6
11 2 9 -170 6
Back
Top Bottom