Yeah, very strange that. Intrigued to know why that wasn't brought to justice. If that had been a straight bloke doing it to a woman.........
-
The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Hales and Stokes
- Thread starter WCC
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, very strange that. Intrigued to know why that wasn't brought to justice. If that had been a straight bloke doing it to a woman.........
rentaghost
Striker
You never played tit cricket like?
Comeback_Kenwyne
Striker
They may provide statements? Will be a big hole in Stokes's (likely) case if they don't.
As far as I can see all three of the defendants are going down either way - you can't bray people like that when they are already backing away, nor can you carry around bottles and f***ing metal poles with clear intent.
But the testimony of the witnesses - most of all the aforementioned would surely affect the judge's sentencing?
Would guess his defence will quite clearly be - they were coming at me with bottles and poles, so this is self-defence.
Think this is going to be a 3-0 victory for the CPS to be honest. The three of them are all incriminating each other.
Yeah I saw it on their live text feed yesterday.
Last edited:
Comeback_Kenwyne
Striker
He's not pressing charges (because, I would surmise, he knows he's in deep shit too). The crown is charging all three - and looks to be in the box seat as far as I can see.
There's some very serious policy questions about the media and justice system that this trial throws up as far as I can see.
I don't say this to help Stokes. He doesn't look deserving of help tbh - but we await all the testimony. But it's going to take something extraordinary to convince me - or anyone reasonable, I would wager - that he has used "reasonable" force in smashing someone down whose already backing away. Likewise, those two toe-rags: they were intent on causing serious harm to all in the vicinity - and they bit off more than they can chew.
HOWEVER
Is this a fair trial? We already heard it from the bouncer - he claimed he hadn't seen the video, but clearly he had? Human's are fallible - our memories are not to be trusted. Psychologists have proven this - we adapt our memories so that they tell a story we prefer and/or think happened. If there is a video as prominent as this in the public domain it is very clearly possible that, quite accidentally, people would adapt their 'eye-witness' accounts to the video evidence.
Should the media be publishing evidence like this before a trial, or handing it over to the police/CPS. I really do think it prejudices the fairness of a trial and other criminal/judicial processes.
Also - I would like to know just how water-tight is the process that is keeping the media's reporting away from the jury. It's leading BBC and many papers every day - and, naturally, they are focusing on the Stokes angle i.e. reporting his involvement not the involvement of the others. This will swing when he gives his defence - but at the moment it's very bad for him. I do think this issue needs to be looked at too.
We're all guilty here - we're all feasting on it, hanging on the media reporting. But is it fair from a judicial perspective? I'm really not sure at all.
The thread should be closed too - I agree with @brandon. And yes, I realise that makes me a hypocrite - but sometimes that's the point of moderation/policy: to protect ourselves from ourselves.
Last edited:
rentaghost
Striker
No in terms of whether his defence will be his testimony only or whether he will have any other supporting evidence ie eye witnesses supporting him regarding the danger he was in etc.
All of this so far has been the prosecution outlining their case and calling witnesses. When the defence get their turn the story will change again
Mainze
Striker
True.
Great post. Definitely zero chance of a fair trial. It is a case of three individuals charged with affray - yet barely any attention has been diverted from Stokes to Hale or Ali.
It's also quite embarrassing just how few of the media (and this forum) seem to be able to grasp what affray actually is.
Sadly that’s the price of fame, the media focus will always be on stokes
We can of course hope that the law treats them equally
As I mentioned earlier, there's no chance of that because they've already treated this case differently - I actually feel sorry for Hale and Ali, because it appears they were more than happy to swallow their pride and move on with their lives.
Unfortunately, the police and CPS want their fifteen minutes of fame.
Our only hope is that the JURY treat them equally.
I don’t necessarily agree with the first part, but I take your point
GordonMuchallNo1Fan
Striker
The defence have already proven the bouncer to be a liar for starters
Comeback_Kenwyne
Striker
Looks a disaster for Stokes. He clocked that guy - so judge seems to suggest that self-defence, if the other guy isn't guilty, might be unlikely.
Again, everything you are reading/hearing is the prosection's version of events so of course it will sound bad for Stokes. Wait until the defence start their side of the story
rentaghost
Striker
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.
Temp0101
Winger
Why would the judge direct a jury to find Hale not guilty after hearing only one side of the story?
- Status
