News International phone-hacking trial

[Guest]

Top marks to Mr Justice Saunders for his opening remarks about the need for a fair trial.

http://theconversation.com/british-justice-on-trial-in-r-v-rebekah-brooks-and-others-19733

Mr Justice Saunders presided over MPs' expenses trials, while Andrew Edis QC's cases include prosecuting Chris Huhne


The Guardian's Nick Davies who has covered the NI phone-hacking scandal since the start is reporting on the trial

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/31/phone-hacking-trial-brooks-coulson-affair

[jean]

...Andrew Edis QC's cases include prosecuting Chris Huhne...

Another recent case was the prosecution of Shafila Ahmed's parents.

[MrGongGong]

Surely we are all sick of these idiots
can't we just arrange to have them sent to somewhere remote and bleak instead of wasting all this time and energy on them having a go at wriggling out of responsibility ?

[ahinton]

Surely we are all sick of these idiots
can't we just arrange to have them sent to somewhere remote and bleak instead of wasting all this time and energy on them having a go at wriggling out of responsibility ?

No. Like anyone else here, they're innocent until proved guilty and the course of justice must be run. We can still be sick of them, though!

[scottycelt]

Top marks to Mr Justice Saunders for his opening remarks about the need for a fair trial.

Suspect you've been somewhat over-generous with your marking there, amsey.

Did you really fear that Mr Justice Saunders might have remarked that there shouldn't be a need for a fair trial... ?

[amateur51]

Surely we are all sick of these idiots
can't we just arrange to have them sent to somewhere remote and bleak instead of wasting all this time and energy on them having a go at wriggling out of responsibility ?

I just want Ms Brooks to spend the next six months fretting about the possibility of a ten year stretch in HMP Holloway, that's all. Oh and Dave to fret about his reputation for sound judgment being trashed a year before a General Election. Nick must be grinning away in the dead of night too.

[amateur51]

Suspect you've been somewhat over-generous with your marking there, amsey.

Did you really fear that Mr Justice Saunders might have remarked that there shouldn't be a need for a fair trial... ?

You don't know what I'm referring to, do you?

Conversation in your house must be so dull, family and fiends having to explain every non-religious reference, while passing around the dictionary.

[scottycelt]

I just want Ms Brooks to spend the next six months fretting about the possibility of a ten year stretch in HMP Holloway, that's all.

Charming ... even if she's innocent?

[teamsaint]

do you really think for a second that she is innocent, scotty ?

[jean]

We have to presume she's innocent, whatever we may think (as the good judge said), and decide this case solely on the evidence and the arguments that [we] hear in court..

He further directed the jurors not to use social media such as Twitter or Facebook to talk about it. I believe he advised them particularly to be on their guard against the Radio 3 Forum.

[scottycelt]

do you really think for a second that she is innocent, scotty ?

I have had no real thoughts on the matter even for a second, ts, but as Jean correctly points out she is presumed innocent until any verdict is reached, and rightly so.

I wouldn't wish "amsey-justice" on my worst enemy!

[Richard Barrett]

I have had no real thoughts

Of course these people are innocent in the eyes of the law until proven guilty, but one could look at is this way: either they knew about the criminal activities and allowed or approved them, in which case they're guilty of that, or they didn't know about them, in which case they were both appallingly negligent. Either way they don't come out of this looking particularly good.

[ahinton]

Of course these people are innocent in the eyes of the law until proven guilty, but one could look at is this way: either they knew about the criminal activities and allowed or approved them, in which case they're guilty of that, or they didn't know about them, in which case they were both appallingly negligent. Either way they don't come out of this looking particularly good.

That's right, of course; I still believe that the course of justice should run as much for them as for anyone else, however. What I presume you to be saying is that the principal purpose of the trial is to establish of precisely what and when the parties concerned are guilty.

[MrGongGong]

Charming ... even if she's innocent?

No smoke without fire
Nothing to fear nothing to hide
and i'm sure there will be justice Peester

(I wasn't being serious ....... but it would be nice to have justice wouldn't it ? ....... I feel the Chumba's coming on )

[teamsaint]

Of course these people are innocent in the eyes of the law until proven guilty, but one could look at is this way: either they knew about the criminal activities and allowed or approved them, in which case they're guilty of that, or they didn't know about them, in which case they were both appallingly negligent. Either way they don't come out of this looking particularly good.

before your creative life, were you ever a sales director, by any chance?

You'd be a natural. !! thumbsupsmileything.