Vicky Pryce Jury Fails To Reach A Verdict

My friends, this was taken from Sky News:

http://news.sky.com/story/1054690/vicky-pryce-jury-fails-to-reach-a-verdict

I have just got around to reading the totally brain-dead questions the jury asked the judge. Was every single one of the jury a member of a We Hate The McCanns, site?

Sample, from:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/vicky-pryce-jury-asks-can-you-define-reasonable-doubt-judge-its-a-doubt-that-is-reasonable-8503427.html

Q5: Can a juror come to a verdict based on a reason that was not presented in court and has no facts or evidence to support it?

Answer: “The answer to that question is a firm no. That is because it would be completely contrary to the directions I have given you.”

Q6: Can we infer anything from the fact that the defence didn’t bring witnesses from the time of the offence, such as the au pair or neighbours?

Answer: “You must not, as I have now emphasised many times, speculate on what witnesses who have not been called might have said or draw inferences from their absence. Her evidence is that no one else, other than Mr Huhne, was present when she signed the form.”

Q7: Does the defendant have an obligation to present a defence?

Answer: “There is no burden on the defendant to prove her innocence and there is no burden on her to prove anything at all. The defendant does not have an obligation to present a defence, in this case the defendant has given evidence and it is for you to judge the evidence from her in the same way you would any other witness.”

Q8. Can we speculate about the events at the time Miss Pryce sent the form or what was in her mind when she sent the form?

Answer: “The answer to that is an equally firm no. The position is that no one must speculate. There is a difference between speculation, which is not permitted, and inference, which is the drawing of common-sense conclusions from the facts of which you are also sure. Speculation is guesswork. That is not the same as inference at all.”

That is EXACTLY the kind of carp the pitchforkers come up with to justify their vendetta. Except they call it 'research'.

That was/is such a basic Case. Was she or was she not coerced or pressured by her husband into accepting his speeding points?
Was there not one single member of The Jury who could explain that to them? Were they all thick?

Yeah, but they speculated cos she was wearin earrings an scratched her nose, that's body language, innit, like on telly.

Oh, an one of them analysed how what everyone was really really sayin only backwards.

An one of them watched CSI so was a profiler, innit.

An the judge only called them a bunch of morons cos its a conspiracy an she's IN IT, innit?

All twelve of them were too thick to understand? It only need one of them with half a brain to direct proceedings.
Personally, I think she was coerced. He informed the authorities that she was driving before he told her, so how was she supposed to tell them that her husband, an MP had lied already. Not many wives would if they wanted a peaceful marriage.

I own up to not having paid much attention to it, Sabot, it came under the general heading of Slimey Politicians....

It's boring and nauseating at the same time, Bonny. Not sure if this leaked out because he bogged off and left her, but I can't say I would blame her.
And all for the sake of not having to employ a Driver. They were hardly broke. But it was the bit about telling the authorities it was her before he told her that got me. That is the mark of a bully.

Most extraordinary of all, they asked whether they could reach a verdict based on a reason that was not presented in court and had no facts or evidence to support it.
Since a criminal trial is no more or less than a trial of the evidence, such a question revealed a fundamental lack of understanding of what a criminal trial actually is.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2282001/Do-need-IQ-TESTS-juries-Vicky-Pryce-trial-exposed-breathtaking-level-ignorance-stupidity.html#ixzz2LYA8ckfU
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook