tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post806690485516400062..comments2023-06-26T15:18:06.600+01:00Comments on The Sheridan Trial: Further charges dropped, Tommy Sheridan Acquitted of suborning a witnessUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-31360001262911283582010-12-03T13:37:56.077+00:002010-12-03T13:37:56.077+00:00Jury members are allowed to take notes during a tr...Jury members are allowed to take notes during a trial. So is the Accused.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-35527743081792919572010-12-03T10:29:55.559+00:002010-12-03T10:29:55.559+00:00Anonymous 11.59 said
'If both TS and GS are t...Anonymous 11.59 said<br /><br />'If both TS and GS are telling the truth their is nothing, absolutely nothing, no matter how hard he tries that AP will be able to do to convince anyone otherwise'<br /><br />Well if I was on the jury I'd like to hear where TS says he was the night of the alleged Cupids visit. I think an SSP cultural weekend was mentioned but witnesses say he didn't turn up at that until the next night.<br /><br />Do jury members take notes during the trial?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-21164518256874628282010-12-03T05:28:18.577+00:002010-12-03T05:28:18.577+00:00You have to remember as well that if we accept the...You have to remember as well that if we accept the narrative that the police had studied the evidence and seriously concluded that Tommy Sheridan and Gail Sheridan amongst others had told a whole power of lies in the libel trial, they will have really been hoping to persuade Gail Sheridan to do some sort of deal in order to catch the bigger fish, so to speak. Like high profile drugs cases where they put pressure on low level dealers, put them in uncomfortable (but legal) witnessroom situations in order to pin down the really powerful, violent ones with the supply links - in exchange for lenient treatment. That's clearly exactly why they held Gail Sheridan for 5 hours despite her saying nothing - they hope you'll crack, confess when you see how horrible having to deal with a hostile police/court service/prison is. It's neither unusual nor is it specific police intimidation - it's just policing as it's done in this country.<br /><br />Whatever you think of the police, think that they're too heavy handed in general and have a general authoritarian agenda - it's pretty absurd to claim that they intimidated the Sheridan's in this case or marked them out for different treatment. I don't know if any of you have ever been inside a police station being questioned about breach of the peace, but let me tell you they are horrible and ask leading questions and attempt to pressure you - aye it should change (via system change) but it's nothing special or unusual. It may not be very pleasant to experience, but then again neither is being slandered and lied about in court, so it seems fair to act within the law to do what is necessary to officially redeem the reputations of whichever side is proven to have been lying in this case - holding someone in a room trying to persuade them to talk when they won't for 5 hours is normal police practise, particularly for serious (ie in the eyes of the law, High Court-headed) crimes like perjury.<br /><br />On an entirely separate point, the jury must be really bloody bored by now. Probably wise for them to cut the flab out of their indictment, if they want to jury to be clearly focused on the actual evidence that has been presented when push comes to shove, pity they didn't do it sooner, for every witness, juror and defendant involved. Although I'm sure Tam didn't mind - he's been doing his best to stretch his questioning to extraction from the moment he took over. Very, very tedious, and no doubt Prentice was getting mindful of that in the jury's eyes as winter dawned upon us in all its icy crapnessAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-19349155813621881332010-12-03T01:34:00.040+00:002010-12-03T01:34:00.040+00:00TS has already tried to convince the trail that th...TS has already tried to convince the trail that the police were effectively acting on behalf of the NOTW.<br /><br />His stance is that this is a political prosecution. <br /><br />I don't think it says anything about GS guilt that she refused to talk to a police force which the defence believes was acting in collusion with the NOTW.<br /><br />From the defence perspective it makes sense for GS to say nothing to the police. Not only are they part of the alleged plot to get the Sheridans but anything said would also be leaked through a "source" to the NOTW.<br /><br />From the prosecution perspective it is a massive own goal that the cop used the PIRA line especially when the evidence shows she was concentrating on her Rosary beads.<br /><br />Bullying a Catholic mum in modern-day Scotland just won't sit well with many people – especially women. What is the composition of the jury again?<br /><br />GS is not a murderer or a terrorist. She is an air hostess who likes tanning machines.<br /><br />She is for all intents and purposes accused of lying in court to protect her man, which is not seen as such a hideous crime by many people.<br /><br />As I've said before. I don't think facts are as crucial in this case as normal. Emotion often gets in the way of the truth, especially when the truth is difficult to discern.<br /><br />In my opinion, from an emotional viewpoint, the zealous cops don't score well. The Crown, which keeps dropping charges despite spending millions on the case, doesn't come out well. The NOTW were dire, the SSP held their own and TS is damaged goods at the moment and is treading water. GS gets plus points for various reasons.<br /><br />There is still some way to go though and things may change especially if Sheridan mounts a convincing case and casts real doubt on the veracity of the tape.Tommy Trial Addictnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-5381416306161358562010-12-03T01:07:00.870+00:002010-12-03T01:07:00.870+00:00Bunc, i have quite a bit of poloice experience, wh...Bunc, i have quite a bit of poloice experience, when it is clear that a wiyness is not going to comment, in the vast majority of cases, police will let them go wihotu waiting the full time, unless there is something to be gsimed from intimidating or pressurising the witness, usually when it iks urgent like if someone is missing. In this case it just looks like it is vindictiveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-4370038823857624432010-12-02T23:59:39.285+00:002010-12-02T23:59:39.285+00:00If both TS and GS are telling the truth their is n...If both TS and GS are telling the truth their is nothing, absolutely nothing, no matter how hard he tries that AP will be able to do to convince anyone otherwise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-14259492677816571302010-12-02T23:52:24.794+00:002010-12-02T23:52:24.794+00:00In my opinion neither TS or GS want to be cross-ex...In my opinion neither TS or GS want to be cross-examined, GS in particular. In my opinion it is very telling. In my opinion if both TS and GS stood up to AP and came away intact I would be voting for an acquittal. Side-stepping the issue just leave a lingering doubt in my opinion. I am really not interested in nowt bugging operations. I want to see BOTH TS and GS take the stand, I want to hear their responses to the allegations that have been made against them. In my opinion, this is what this case hinges on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-63470225645704087972010-12-02T23:48:48.685+00:002010-12-02T23:48:48.685+00:00Quite a few on here last week were trying to convi...Quite a few on here last week were trying to convince the rest of us that Lord Bracadale was going to stop the trial and tell the defendants that they had no case to answer. Nutty theory #1 out the window......Next???Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-82373884798863947302010-12-02T23:37:13.183+00:002010-12-02T23:37:13.183+00:00Do you have any experience of the police Peter? Yo...Do you have any experience of the police Peter? You really think that most suspects who refuse to talk just get handed a nice cup of tea and a biscuit and that the police don't see if they can find a "button to press"? What do you expect them to do just sit in silence for an hour or two twiddling their thumbs. They tried to rattle her - so what?<br /><br />And yes I do think there were problems with some of the prosection witnesses. But I think the prosecution still has a robust case overall that TS will now have to try to answer - and I personally have no reasonable doubt about where the truth of this case is to be found. The jury will make of it what they will.<br />It will be interesting to see if TS and GS are prepared to to expose themselves to cross examination wont it?Bunchttp://ayrshireblog.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-14932929372937684632010-12-02T23:29:25.702+00:002010-12-02T23:29:25.702+00:00Peter , check James's report again. Police Off...Peter , check James's report again. Police Officer did not STATE she may be in contact with terrorists, he compared the tactics she was using to avoid answering questions with those used by the IRA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-18318126303271684572010-12-02T23:28:30.804+00:002010-12-02T23:28:30.804+00:00I wonder how the defence witnesses will stand up t...I wonder how the defence witnesses will stand up to cross-examination by AP, will be interesting to watch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-57960986603411932812010-12-02T23:21:35.099+00:002010-12-02T23:21:35.099+00:00Peter said...
Clive & Bunc,
I have m...Peter said...<br /><br /> Clive & Bunc,<br /><br /> I have made a note of your criticisms of the defence.<br /><br /> Now that it has ended was there any part of the Crown prosecution that you consider to be weak?<br /><br /> Maybe to save time just list in your opinion the three weakest parts of the Crown case but more if you wish.<br /><br /> Thanks,<br /><br /> Peter<br /><br />December 2, 2010 10:50 PM<br /><br /> I doubt that anon, I assume she said "no comment" or whatever. Perhaps we will hear from Mrs Sheridan herself?<br /><br /> December 2, 2010 10:56 PM<br /><br /><br />"Clive" said...<br /><br /> Peter,<br /><br /> I'd rather not play. Sorry.<br /><br /> "Clive"<br /><br /> December 2, 2010 11:00 PM<br /><br /><br />Ok Clive duly noted,<br /><br />How about you Bunc?<br /><br />I will give you the first one to get you going. <br /><br />The police stating a Catholic detainee may be in contact with terrorists for exercising her legal right to silence.<br /><br />That is in my top three. Could you pick the other two Crown disasters and see if we agree?<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />PeterPeternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-48045705757892674492010-12-02T23:06:48.491+00:002010-12-02T23:06:48.491+00:00Former SSP, I think the sister of TS might turn up...Former SSP, I think the sister of TS might turn up on defence witness list as TS claims she was there when Dr Nick McKerrell had a meeting with him at Caledonian University when he alleged that TS discussed visit to cupids. Dr Nick says only TS and himself were present.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-53345071046723482622010-12-02T23:00:38.387+00:002010-12-02T23:00:38.387+00:00Peter,
I'd rather not play. Sorry.
"Cli...Peter,<br /><br />I'd rather not play. Sorry.<br /><br />"Clive""Clive"noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-57978161566051863862010-12-02T22:56:33.698+00:002010-12-02T22:56:33.698+00:00I doubt that anon, I assume she said "no comm...I doubt that anon, I assume she said "no comment" or whatever. Perhaps we will hear from Mrs Sheridan herself?Scepticnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-52108551993228961172010-12-02T22:55:22.512+00:002010-12-02T22:55:22.512+00:00@ Sceptic - what 5 hours of staring at a wall with...@ Sceptic - what 5 hours of staring at a wall without saying ONE word - seriously?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-70432897832180312562010-12-02T22:50:05.267+00:002010-12-02T22:50:05.267+00:00Clive & Bunc,
I have made a note of your cri...Clive & Bunc, <br /><br />I have made a note of your criticisms of the defence.<br /><br />Now that it has ended was there any part of the Crown prosecution that you consider to be weak?<br /><br />Maybe to save time just list in your opinion the three weakest parts of the Crown case but more if you wish.<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />PeterPeternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-80047855356439308332010-12-02T22:49:14.985+00:002010-12-02T22:49:14.985+00:00Gail was under interrogation for 5 hours anon.Gail was under interrogation for 5 hours anon.Scepticnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-75290678838148259142010-12-02T22:45:54.046+00:002010-12-02T22:45:54.046+00:00Clive
I think that you are seriously mistaken, th...Clive<br /><br />I think that you are seriously mistaken, that I am seriously mistaken! I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.Keithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10634512888535904643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-39815229092559359652010-12-02T22:44:24.413+00:002010-12-02T22:44:24.413+00:00I still don't get all the stuff about rosary b...I still don't get all the stuff about rosary beads and staring at a wall, surely a competent solicitor/QC would just have said that if you don't want to answer any questions just say I told you not to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-75300904221550511052010-12-02T22:42:10.872+00:002010-12-02T22:42:10.872+00:00Silence in a police interview/station is mentioned...Silence in a police interview/station is mentioned EVEN if the Accussed has already given an explanation in evidence. i.e to give the impression that they "needed time to make up a story."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-7910081520891909482010-12-02T22:24:09.399+00:002010-12-02T22:24:09.399+00:00TVOR,
I think you are seriously mistaken if you t...TVOR,<br /><br />I think you are seriously mistaken if you think silence during the police interview will not be referred to during the summing up.<br /><br />"Clive""Clive"noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-11887907928565212462010-12-02T22:22:19.995+00:002010-12-02T22:22:19.995+00:00Clive,
Taking rosary beads from a woman, then ask...Clive,<br /><br />Taking rosary beads from a woman, then asking her if she has been trained by the Provisional IRA doesn't do the prosecution any favours at all either. Especially when she is being questioned about possible perjury charges in Scotland not Ireland. Where is the link there? I fail to see it. If the prosecution bring up her silence, the defence will bring up the rosary beads and PIRA, who will benefit from that?Keithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10634512888535904643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-38843687370540238132010-12-02T22:10:36.305+00:002010-12-02T22:10:36.305+00:00Re: the right to silence.
There is a distinction ...Re: the right to silence.<br /><br />There is a distinction between the prosecutor's statutory right to comment on the failure of an <i>accused</i> to give <i>evidence</i> (which is allowed, although must be done with restraint), and commenting on the failure of a <i>suspect</i>, not yet charged with any offence, to answer police questioning at a stage when they have no idea of the strength or weakness of the case against them.<br /><br />It is important not to confuse them. In practice it would be remarkable for the Crown to refer to silence in the police station, unless the accused came up with a quite startling alibi or explanation in their evidence at trial. That, of course, would be surprising in a perjury trial.the_voice_of_reasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10179007944478552588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-500792161594913167.post-22878186939921642542010-12-02T22:04:01.087+00:002010-12-02T22:04:01.087+00:00Keith,
I don't think silence in a police inte...Keith,<br /><br />I don't think silence in a police interview does a defendant any favours at all.<br /><br />"Clive""Clive"noreply@blogger.com