the dude
Striker
Because after hearing the prosecution evidence against him he feels there isn't enough evidence to warrant a guilty verdict.Why would the judge direct a jury to find Hale not guilty after hearing only one side of the story?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Because after hearing the prosecution evidence against him he feels there isn't enough evidence to warrant a guilty verdict.Why would the judge direct a jury to find Hale not guilty after hearing only one side of the story?
We don't know what his defence is until we hear itThe gay lads were supposed to be a key part of his defense. Defending himself against Ryan Hale was supposed to be a key part of his defense. He's knocked out one lad who the judge has deemed innocent, it will take Petrocelli to get him out of this one.
But the CPS did, so why bother with a juries?Because after hearing the prosecution evidence against him he feels there isn't enough evidence to warrant a guilty verdict.
The gay lads were supposed to be a key part of his defense. Defending himself against Ryan Hale was supposed to be a key part of his defense. He's knocked out one lad who the judge has deemed innocent, it will take Petrocelli to get him out of this one.
I get drunker now off 3 or 4 pints than I used to off 8 or 9 when I was Stoke's age. Still drunk mind I suppose.Had at least 10 drinks. But not drunk
Ok![]()
Don't know mate, just part of the legal process. A judge knows the law and if they feel the case isn't good they are free to direct the jury in this way.But the CPS did, so why bother with a juries?
I'm more bemused by the famous professional cricketer who has put himself in this position.I'm still bemused with this Hale bloke. Waving bottles and metal road sign pole about, and he wonders why he got smacked? Thick as fuck
I'm more bemused by the famous professional cricketer who has put himself in this position.
We kind of do. He went back to the club and tried to pay hundreds of quid to get inWe don't know why he was outside or why he was in that position but it's not normal behaviour waving metal poles and bottles about outside in a public area. Do that round here you'd rightfully get kicked in.
We kind of do. He went back to the club and tried to pay hundreds of quid to get in
Well that’s why he was outside"hundreds" according to the bouncer who has already lied in this case. £60-£70 according to Stokes.
Stokes can do no wrong with the opWell that’s why he was outside
We don't know why he was outside or why he was in that position but it's not normal behaviour waving metal poles and bottles about outside in a public area. Do that round here you'd rightfully get kicked in.
Because after hearing the prosecution evidence against him he feels there isn't enough evidence to warrant a guilty verdict.
Had at least 10 drinks. But not drunk
Ok![]()
But the CPS did, so why bother with a juries?
I'm still bemused with this Hale bloke. Waving bottles and metal road sign pole about, and he wonders why he got smacked? Thick as fuck
When did Robin Cook get called to give evidence?
Logon or register to see this image