Crown Court ; Criminal Libel Part 6/6

Рет қаралды 5,112

WuJP8888

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 21

@shadylady4829 Жыл бұрын

the locked door swung it for me...the doctor did it

@davidhenrywall8619 Жыл бұрын

Great series , Dorothy Vernon good actress.

@gerryofmander8663 4 жыл бұрын

Fortunately criminal libel has now been repealed in the UK. It's ridiculous that you essentially had a presumption of guilt, you had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you did NOT lie in order to avoid a guilty verdict, instead of the prosecution having to prove that you DID lie.

@philwoodward5069 3 жыл бұрын

This is a most unusual case in which, putting myself in the position of the juror, I would have listened to the judge's direction as to the law and concluded "that's outrageous, I can't accept that. I'm going to vote not guilty even though I believe the defendant to be guilty in law". The nice thing about being a juror is you don't have to show your working. What is legally right is not always morally right.

@gerryofmander8663 3 жыл бұрын

@@philwoodward5069 Yup, jury nullification is a major upside of the jury trial system.

@MrGranfield 4 жыл бұрын

My gut feeling is that the doctor did perform an abortion, but there was no proof, hence the verdict.

@lindaluckett4032 2 ай бұрын

The doctor locked the door

@fintankeyes6050 2 жыл бұрын

Do not agree with the jury

@anotherblonde 5 жыл бұрын

I bet nowadays the verdict would've gone in favour of the tennis star, everyone has such little faith in doctors.

@alwaysdisputin9930 5 жыл бұрын

i dunno cause people hate pedos & she was 16. Also they had to be sure beyond a reasonable doubt he'd performed the abortion & there wasn't enough evidence of that. However, i think on the balance of probabilities, he did it - the locked door, the doctor's strong wish for her to be a star, he seemed like a bit of a wanker, he probably sedated her & vacuumed it out

@colettemartin4824 Жыл бұрын

Writer steered us in the direction of guilty as sin.

@wowowuk 3 жыл бұрын

I don't know why the defence accepted that the letter had been published - except for dramatic purposes to concentrate on the justification argument. In reality it was the police officer who completed the publication of the letter (by delivering it). Who can say whether the accused, having survived his suicide, would not have chosen instead to destroy the letter? Until the letter is posted or otherwise delivered by the sender, it surely remains the property of the sender - and if the suicide had been successful the property of his estate. The Police Officer is guilty! As an aside it was interesting to note this episode was written by Peter Wildeblood who was himself accused of homosexuality in the Montagu case.

@mckavitt 8 жыл бұрын

Once again, :-/ to the verdict.

@Silly.Old.Sisyphus Жыл бұрын

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you have heard the summing up by the judge, which is a complete load of bollix, because the writing of a letter does not constitute publication. Moreover, it is not libel if the writer believes it to be true, regardless of whether it is true - for if it were otherwise, all adverse political comment in all newspapers and other media would be libel.

@GariSullivan 6 жыл бұрын

Quite a few of the verdicts, I disagree with. This one I thought was spot on.

@alwaysdisputin9930 5 жыл бұрын

yeah because he had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the abortion had occurred. IMO he did probably cut it out though. It doesn't seem like a just result. The tennis star lost everything. I think maybe the law is too protective of reputation