Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
|
jamesieboy
|
Is Tommy Sheridan guilty?It seems the feminists in the SSP are ready to spill the beans on him.
Personally, I think he will be jailed this time - and not just for a few weeks.
|
Scott2006
|
I'll leave it up to the court system to decide.
I hope Tommy gets himself the best legal team - that will use the actual law as it is interpretated, and not a right-on grandstanding politician-lawyer. I've heard the lawyer he seems to want to use has messed up a few trials with putting the wrong emphasis on points of law to the detriment of his clients.
|
Rinty
|
You would be wrong on the point of the lawyer scott, the sheridans have the best QCs and lawyers for this case, their first choices and well aware of the case.
Jamesie has no idea whether this trial, if it goes ahead, will be a guilty or not guilty verdict, it is pointless to speculate.
As it is a live case, discussion of any aspect of the possible evidence in the case is sub judice.
The very heading of this thread, asking the question of guilt, could see the owners of the forum in trouble, so I suggest this thread is closed.
Only aspects surrounding the investigations, the split in the parties etc, providing they dont cross into actual evidence given, would be OK.
|
Lord Pitsligo
|
Isn't this thread, by its very title, potentially libellous?
|
Alasdair
|
| Lord Pitsligo wrote: | | Isn't this thread, by its very title, potentially libellous? |
No it's a legitimate question.
Although I do think that the sub judice thing is slightly over-egged on this forum ... no offence to the admin team, I'm sure you know better than I!!!
|
Rinty
|
"No it's a legitimate question."
Yes but it is the legitimate question of a live court case and any publicly expressed opinion on it can potentially influence the case, therefore sub judice laws to protect the right to a fair trial.
The arguments for and against Tommy or Gail Sheridan being guilty of any crime should be heard in a court of law and decided by a jury of their peers.
|
Alasdair
|
| Rinty wrote: | | Yes but it is the legitimate question of a live court case and any publicly expressed opinion on it can potentially influence the case, therefore sub judice laws to protect the right to a fair trial. |
But what is the jurisdiction of such law? Does it even cover these types of informal online discussions, obviously liablous cases have arisen from forums, but can the same be said for sub-judice?
Presumabley the law couldn't punish me for discussing this in the pub or walking down the street say, i.e. a fairly public forum ... or maybe it could 
I doubt that there is any real danger from anything anyone could say here ... although I could be wrong.
I take it there has been some discussion elsewhere on here, or the forum owner, has made the sub judice decision - which I respect - I'm just wondering about the extent to which such laws can be enforced on on-line communities such as this one.
|
Rinty
|
The laws are not often enforced against the publishers but can be much easier used by the defence, so even wothout prosecution we can stil be influencing the case.
The fact that I am involved here means that it is read by those with an interest in the case, so even though this might be a small forum, it is importnat that we dont cross the line.
No, there is nothing wrong with debating it with your mates, that isnt the same as making that opinion public, during a live case.
|
Red Justice
|
I agree with Rinty.
And besides the question in the topic heading invites presumption which is not fair on any defence.
|
Alasdair
|
| Rinty wrote: | | The fact that I am involved here means that it is read by those with an interest in the case, so even though this might be a small forum, it is importnat that we dont cross the line. |
fair-play I suppose ...
RJ, I'm not sure that the title invites any presumption, it's the question any prosecution worth their salt would be asking.
|
Rinty
|
No its the question that the prosecution will be trying to prove, not asking.
The question invites opinions that would be sub judice. There was a case involving ASLEF union where the court ruled that the number of people who visit an online site doesnt necesarily equal the amount of people who read an opinion or the amount of damage done.
Also, because many of the anti-sheridan brigade come here under psuedonyms, we cannot be sure that the 'opinions' are not being put forward by witnesses or people with a direct interest in wanting Tommy to be found guilty.
|
Dave Coull
|
Re: Is Tommy Sheridan guilty?Jamesieboy asked "Is Tommy Sheridan guilty?" and gave as his own answer | Quote: | | I think he will be jailed this time - and not just for a few weeks. |
Jamesie, it may not have been your intention, but, by expressing that view on a public forum which includes some of the witnesses concerned with this case, a public forum which is definitely read by some of the lawyers concerned with the case, you may just have made it much harder for the prosecution to achieve the result you describe.
|
agentmancuso
|
Subject best dropped in the meantime.
|
|
|
|