Innocent until proven guilty??

[HiVibes]

3 hours ago, Passing Time said:

Or as he stated earlier, picking his battles...

More like avoiding any battles. He knows if would get tore apart in there if he expressed the dimwiited guff he posts on here.

[Passing Time]

1 hour ago, HiVibes said:

More like avoiding any battles. He knows if would get tore apart in there if he expressed the dimwiited guff he posts on here.

I think he dumbs it down especially for you... 

[forestboy]

1 hour ago, HiVibes said:

More like avoiding any battles. He knows if would get tore apart in there if he expressed the dimwiited guff he posts on here.

Pot calling kettle!!! 

[HeliX]

5 hours ago, Passing Time said:

Or as he stated earlier, picking his battles...

How long into his term should we expect to wait for him to pick one?

[forestboy]

6 minutes ago, HeliX said:

How long into his term should we expect to wait for him to pick one?

Hopefully the VED inconsistency 

[HiVibes]

8 minutes ago, HeliX said:

How long into his term should we expect to wait for him to pick one?

A couple of months before next election, quite likely the same time he will post something backward and nasty on social media to keep convince his moronic followers that he is 'still a rebel' despite rubberstamping every thing he is asked to.

 

[Moghrey Mie]

So back to the original question. Should defendants have anonymity?

[manxman1980]

1 minute ago, Moghrey Mie said:

So back to the original question. Should defendants have anonymity?

Yes...

Plus the legal system needs fixing.

[Harry Lamb]

19 hours ago, A fool and his money..... said:

To be fair to Stu, he did well today bringing up the solar panels on the sorting office roof. As someone who I think it's fair to say is a bit  of a sceptic with the climate change thing, he could have just kept quiet and towed the party line but he didn't.

https://proofed.com/writing-tips/idiom-tips-tow-the-line-or-toe-the-line/

[A fool and his money.....]

3 hours ago, Harry Lamb said:

https://proofed.com/writing-tips/idiom-tips-tow-the-line-or-toe-the-line/

#sadbastard

[2bees]

This naming is beyond a joke, how can it be stopped? I’ve seen the name’s of three possible rapists this week, i wonder if they would report on not guilty verdicts?

[Passing Time]

3 hours ago, 2bees said:

This naming is beyond a joke, how can it be stopped? I’ve seen the name’s of three possible rapists this week, i wonder if they would report on not guilty verdicts?

It's beyond horrifying. What happens if they are innocent. The damage has already been done. Way beyond time the courts stopped papers naming until after a guilty verdict not before

[Steve_Christian]

4 hours ago, Passing Time said:

It's beyond horrifying. What happens if they are innocent. The damage has already been done. Way beyond time the courts stopped papers naming until after a guilty verdict not before

But if everyone knows it’s innocent until proven guilty, it’s not the reporters fault. It’s the people jumping to conclusions. Educate the people as opposed to suppress the press? 

[NoTailT]

51 minutes ago, Steve_Christian said:

But if everyone knows it’s innocent until proven guilty, it’s not the reporters fault. It’s the people jumping to conclusions. Educate the people as opposed to suppress the press? 

The problem is, if someone goes to trial they're assumed guilty by say 75% of a jury. It's very hard for a defendant to not only fight their case but also overcome this. The same mentality applies to reporting and it won't change. Someone has been charged with something, so there MUST be an element of it, right? Not always and I don't trust out AGs office in the slightest.

[Roger Mexico]

7 hours ago, 2bees said:

This naming is beyond a joke, how can it be stopped? I’ve seen the name’s of three possible rapists this week, i wonder if they would report on not guilty verdicts?

Or indeed on cases that were dropped for lack of evidence.

Even long and expensive trials may get no public reporting at all.  I noticed a judgment the other day concerning a case R v Joanna Thomas.  It was actually concerning how much of the defence costs should be paid but the background information gives some idea of what happened:

8. Ms Thomas faced lengthy criminal proceedings which culminated in her being acquitted by the jury of 3 counts on the 5th December 2022. Five other counts had been dismissed by me at the close of the prosecution case on the basis that there was no case to answer. The full reasons for that decision are contained in my Ruling of 30th November 2022.

(That ruling isn't on the Judgments website) And yet the only media reference to the case I can find is from a Court appearance over four years ago, when she and a co-defendant were in Court for these charges.  There's no mention of what was a long and complex trial.

That's not the only strange omission concerning this case.  As the above ruling explains part of the that four year delay was caused by the courts:

13.When the matter was listed for trial in September 2021 Deemster Cook, then presiding, wrongly ruled that Ms Thomas had been charged under the incorrect section (i.e. section 142 and not section 143) and that there was no case to answer. He dismissed all the charges against her on this basis, including those two counts charged under section 14 of the Anti-Terrorism and Crime Act 2003, notwithstanding that this statute had no equivalent to section 143 POCA 2008. This Ruling was overturned by the Staff of Government Division on appeal in April 2022.

You'd think a Deemster getting things so wrong and having their judgment overturned (and the appeal was published) would attract some attention from the media, but apparently not.  And media bias in reporting simple stuff ('X was charged ) rather than long and complex stuff ( X was innocent because ) means that there is a distortion in the online record.