Aussie wrote on Oct 19^th, 2022 at 6:04pm:


Me, whether guilty or innocent, either way you want to get found innocent, yeah?, would probably follow what I was councelled to, to achieve that outcome. I don't know that you can hinge the rest of his life on that cementing his guilt.

What about that dress she wore on the night without panties! which she said she hid under her bed because of shame and said she never wore again untill a photo emerged of her wearing it 2 weeks later and probably commando style, she forgot about that, Reynolds might have been right all along calling her a "lying cow" consider your verdict.

Her ex bosses in Reynolds and Cash have not given her any character references, they bagged her.

Setanta wrote on Oct 19^th, 2022 at 5:20pm:


Yes.  Ferfuqsake, how dumb are people?

Here I am sitting observing, just like the Jury but they are hearing it, reading that she has SWORN on OATH that he raped her.  So....I (they) look around and say.  'So, what does he say?'

The answer is...at the end of the Prosecution case... he told the Cops he did nothing...nada...did not do it.  Not on oath.

So I says to myself (and the Jury can do the same)....will he get in the Box and SWEAR ON OATH he did not do it.  Will he allow himself to be cross examined so that he can explain why he gave THREE different versions.

(This is what actually happens.)

At the end of the Prosecution case, the Judge asks the Defence Counsel if they propose to call evidence.  That happened in this case.

I was waiting with bated breath to hear the answer, as the Jury would have been.

The answer was, 'No.'

So........what am I left with.  What is the Jury left with to consider.

On the one hand, I, they have the SWORN evidence of Higgins who was in the box before them, and they saw her talk and they saw her answer questions UNDER OATH including being cross-examined.  They had a first hand opportunity to evaluate her in all respects

On the other hand, I, they, have seen a video of the accused being questioned by the Coppers at the Cop Shop....he NOT under oath, and he NOT cross-examined.  He likely had a Lawyer by his side at the time also but I am conjecturing there.  Point is....he could and did say whatever he liked to Coppers without repercussion and under no pressure of a Court Room and the presence of a Judge and a Jury watching him talk.

So.....here we are, the Jury, tossing things up.....who do I believe, her or him.

ONE factor that is taken into account is that he never fronted the Jury in the box, she did.  Sworn and tested testimony v untested gibber to a Copper.

Take your pick.

One of the cons in not calling evidence, including from the accused is....that Defence Counsel gets second last shot at talking to the Jury.  Crown goes first, Defence second and then the 13th Juror.

If the Defence calls evidence, Defence goes first, then Crown, then 13th Juror.

There is an advantage in going second and ferfuqsake I do hope I don't have to explain that...or do I?

So....why did I decide I was happy to convict beyond reasonable doubt?

1.  He gave three different versions about why he had to go to PHouse that night.  That is telling.  If there was truth being told, there is ONE reason, or maybe two but both reasons given at the same time, not three different reasons given at three different times.

2.  She swore he raped her.

3.  That is pretty good stuff indicating guilt.

4.  So......my concerns have to reasonably vanish if he gets in the Box and (a) denies he touched her and (b) also explains why there are THREE different reasons for being at the alleged crime scene.  I expected that an innocent man would have no issue doing that.   He failed my litmus test on who is telling the truth.

Setanta wrote on Oct 19^th, 2022 at 6:56pm:


No Lawyer is gonna 'councel' you one way or the other.  They are going to give you the pros and the cons either way, and not make the selection for you.

As I said, that will be in detailed writing and that writing will not have a recommendation either way.

The fact that Brittany kept drinking shows me she was not able to exercise self control. And the consequences of her decision to continue drinking was that she placed herself in a potentially dangerous situation.