Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 1
st, 2013 at 9:59pm:
Thomson is pretty much guilty, its only a matter of time there.
His defence is so outlandish, he obviously couldnt convince either Gillard or Shorten, hence they cut him loose.
Not my charges - yet his card used, his phone used to call 3 escort agencies and then apparently they must have put his card back??
Yeah of course they did Craig....
Why did the prosecution offer him a deal if like you say he is guilty
YESTERDAY, in the Melbourne Magistrates Court, Craig Thomson was left scratching his head.
In what has been the latest bizarre event in the whole saga surrounding the former MP, the prosecution in the criminal case have gone all schizophrenic on us, offering one thing and doing another.
Sources close to the case have told IA of the prosecution approaching Thomson with an offer they likely hoped would be too good ‒ or Thomson too broke ‒ to refuse.
An offer was reportedly put to Thomson's to plead guilty to one single new lesser charge of ‘gaining advantage by deception’ and all of the other charges would be dropped.
The advantage to Thomson would be he would no longer have to spend a king's ransom defending the 173 charges that, apparently, are no longer important in the eyes of the prosecution.
The advantage to the prosecution being that as their case crumbles due to a lack of any evidence to support their charges, they have at least saved some face by being able to say they laid a charge after Thomson made a deal.
Thomson refused the offer deciding instead to pursue justice through the court system so the public is left with no lingering questions about his guilt or innocence.
In a shock move, the prosecution then decided to lay another 50 charges on Thomson.
Our information above is supported by a refreshingly fair and balanced report on proceedings by
Brad Norington and Rachel Baxendale, published in The Australian today, which seems to agree with our long-term reporting that the case against Thomson is collapsing.