My hope is that JB is found guilty - and leaves football for good. I have a law degree but never worked in criminal law. One thing I learnt was that you can never be certain of is how things will pan out in a trial - there are plenty of guilty people walking our streets and plenty of innocent people incarcerated. The most reliable evidence is film, video or photographic which is why the police have asked for this evidence on Facebook etc. Eyewitness accounts from a 'neutral' source are more likely to be unchallenged than those from someone who works with or is a friend of the accused or the victim.
At a stroke you've just put the English judicial system on it's arse. Perhaps you'd like to rephrase or reconsider?
If he denies any wrongdoing then why did he arrive on the team coach then try and sneak out in a directors car? He denied assaulting Dabo. He also denied the assault on the guy outside Macdonalds. His words mean nothing.
The above is circumstantial evidence and in many cases convictions are obtained based on circumstantial evidence. I
Basically i guess in summary, Not enough police to catch a criminal, not enough CPS funds to go to court, when they do they disregard witness statement whether there are many or a few, the outcome is then challenged on semantics, if and only if a person is found guilty, then they lock em up with a library, three meals a day, satellite TV, games, pastimes and such like, then release them a third of their way through sentence. No can anyone tell me what the deterrent is?
an example - you walk into a room and see a man firing a gun and killing another man - that is direct evidence. you walk into a room and see a dead body on the floor, a gun by his side and another man in the room - you don't actually see the shot being fired - the evidence you would submit would be circumstantial. It might be accepted in court it might not. Do you really think Barton's past record or his means of transport to leave the ground is going to get him convicted ?
I give up. I am too tired to engage in any dialogue with you. I suppose everyone deserves a 271st chance to be a better person.
Neither are witness statements according to you. You also think they give the accused the benefit of doubt based on his say-so. I think the Law Society has had a narrow escape.
But if two people walk into a room and see a man firing a gun and killing another man then that's problematic because of the possibility of collusion? Just making sure we're all on the same page here.
Your comparison is a gross false equivalence. In your scenario forensic evidence would be the key factor in relation to the CPS pursuing a successful prosecution that culminates in a guilty verdict.
If it goes to trial, you can bet this is part of the prosecutions case, but again? It’s not proof of anything.
Sp?? If you are a Barnsley supporter you'd be wanting Barton to be prosecuted, but you ain't. **** off