Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

Some interesting comments in the CoA judgment.

"The Judge was obliged to make a large number of rulings, far too many in our view. " -that's not the judge's fault

Prosecution claimed that "many of the problems were caused by a 'constant barrage' of defence applications for disclosure of material that was irrelevant to the issues in the case " - whereas one defendant didn't even bother to file a case statement.

There was CCTV recording of the defendants trying to steal a car - their counsel applied to have it excluded on the basis it was not evidence of fact, but "bad character" evidence.

"During the first trial the jury sent a message or messages to the Judge in which complaint was made about rude and childish behaviour on the part of counsel 'in the front row'. "

"As it seems to us, prosecution counsel and the Judge became far too accommodating of defence counsel's demands. There seems to have been a misunderstanding on the part of defence counsel as to what can be legitimately demanded of the prosecution and what cannot." -so actually the judge was too helpful

"The application to discharge the jury was totally disproportionate. The impact of the jury learning the applicant had a pepper spray in his car must have been negligible. Thereafter, the Judge directed the jury in robust terms that the evidence was irrelevant and was to be disregarded."

"Many of the defence applications were totally unmeritorious, bad points were taken and much court time wasted. Some of the submissions (of both the applicants' counsel) suggest a lack of proper respect for the court. Ms Russell's complaints about the Judge's favouring others such as the jury or co defending counsel indicate an unfortunate over sensitivity, lack of objectivity and lack of understanding of the role of the Judge in managing a jury trial. We do not expect counsel to behave or react in this way."

It's basically an utter rinsing of defence counsel and the criticisms of the judge are much more muted. Instead the CoA says that she ran the applications properly and with appropriate care.

Your details

Cancel