Higgins investigation top cop: Drumgold mistook ABC re-enactment for ‘missing’ CCTV footage.
-
Latest Posts
-
Recent Comments
-
TCL Archive
- December 2023 (29)
- November 2023 (88)
- October 2023 (100)
- September 2023 (84)
- August 2023 (74)
- July 2023 (89)
- June 2023 (81)
- May 2023 (88)
- April 2023 (90)
- March 2023 (118)
- February 2023 (84)
- January 2023 (101)
- December 2022 (62)
- November 2022 (72)
- October 2022 (83)
- September 2022 (81)
- August 2022 (82)
- July 2022 (83)
- June 2022 (113)
- May 2022 (80)
- April 2022 (114)
- March 2022 (117)
- February 2022 (120)
- January 2022 (126)
- December 2021 (116)
- November 2021 (112)
- October 2021 (126)
- September 2021 (84)
- August 2021 (6)
-
Post Categories
- Art, music, letters
- Australian police state
- Climate hoax
- Culture
- Defence and national security
- Economics and the economy
- Education
- Elections
- Ethics and morality
- Fake conservatism
- Fake news
- Fake science
- Federal politics
- Foreign policy
- General
- History
- International
- Left-wing extremism
- Left-wing hypocrisy
- Legal affairs
- Media
- Politics
- Religion and faith
- Rule of law
- Science and technology
- Social media
- Sport
- State politics
- US politics
- War and peace
- War on Christianity
- Whatever
“Show me the man and I will show you the crime”!
If this footage exists surely the security at Parliament House would still have it.
Why has no one asked them?
In fact security guards seem curiously absent from most of the court case coverage I have seen.
The AFP didn’t tell Shane that it was an ABC reenactment?
Why did they provide an ABC reenactment?
And what happened to the CCTV footage?
No one is seriously claiming that Parliament House doesn’t have CCTV cameras at the entrances to the building, if not in all the hallways and Meeting Rooms?
Ed – the AFP provided all the cctv footage they had, it just didn’t show what Drumgold was expecting, because he was expecting the 4-corners re-enactment.
The heat should come on Ms Jerome too, and maybe it will.
The other matter in which she may have played a role is the failure of the prosecution to inform the defence of Fiona Brown’s desire to be recalled so that she might dispute Higgins’ evidence that she had been pressured by Reynolds and Brown. As I see it, this is a critical episode in this disgraceful saga.
This claim was the foundation for the relentless and possibly very successful attacks by Gallagher and Wong.
If, on the trial, Brown’s rebuttal had, in the eyes if the jury, badly damaged Higgins’ credibility, Lehrmann may have been acquitted. Not necessarily of course, as it’s possible that at least one juror was a committed MeToo believer.
Sofronoff must choose which matters he will pursue. Let’s hope this is one of them.
If Dumbgold had a copy, why did he not copy it for future review?
If only one Juror was holding oput for Conviction, the Judge wouldna kept sending the Jury back, because it woulda been obvious there wasn’t any possibility of a Conviction from 1/11 down.
The other matter in which she may have played a role is the failure of the prosecution to inform the defence of Fiona Brown’s desire to be recalled so that she might dispute Higgins’ evidence that she had been pressured by Reynolds and Brown. As I see it, this is a critical episode in this disgraceful saga.
Reynolds and Cash had that desire as well, so Drumgold had them declared Hostile Witnesses.
The Defence still coulda called them, but didn’t.
Same goes for Brown.
Ed, I’m sure you can provide some evidence of another case where that has happened, particularly one this high profile.
The scene is nicely set for a senate inquiry replete with questions from Sarah Sea Patrol
Here’s the process:
Jury Foreman tells Judge that a verdict is unable to be reached.
Does Judge
#1. request the numbers from Jury Foreman to decide whether they should continue deliberations, or
#2. tosses a coin?
Oh, he’s sure he saw the CCTV footage, in just the same way that Gillian Triggs was “sure” she had seen armed security guards in the Manus Island detention centre.
Very serious allegations that the AFP destroyed CCTV footage, especially if they’d dumb enough to let the DPP have a look, they should also have made a copy available to defence council, shouldn’t they?
Drumgold is being Gaslit.
How is he expected to know that something provided as Evidence by the AFP was an ABC reenactment?
Clearly it couldn’t have been Evidence, other than evidence that the AFP were jerking him around and taking a personal rather than professional interest in the Lehrmann Case.
I’d forgotten about Gillian Triggs and her beliefs.
Ed back to prove his comprehension skills are below poor again, the only person gaslighting Ed is you, here.
In a case where a unanimous verdict is required, the judge sends the jury back until the jury foreman declares that there is no likelihood of a verdict, even then they usually send them back at least once. In a high media profile case with political ramification, there was no way the judge was going to declare no verdict. No one wants a retrial.
Ed, you are so ignorant, that even when people point out you’re on the wrong track, you don’t bother to enquire as to what you could do to remedy your own incuriousity.
In a high media profile case with political ramification, there was no way the judge was going to declare no verdict. No one wants a retrial.
The Judge can’t declare No Verdict.
The Jury Foreman had already told Judge twice that they couln’t reach a unanimous Verdict.
Plenty of Criminal Trials end with the Jury unable to reach a Verdict.
Judge calls a Mistrial.
Do you seriously claim that the Judge and counsel wouldn’t be informed of the numbers?
How is it fair to a Defendant if a Jury keeps getting sent back to deliberate some more if only 1 Juror is hanging out for a Conviction?
Not to mention a colossal waste of a Court’s time?
Grandpa Cletus
Quote us the relevant guidelines for jury considerations.
Ed, I was a juror in a case where the jury was ordered back by the judge 5 or 6 times due to one juror. No one wants a mistrial, the judges have more than enough work to do, many of these cases take years to appear before court. Court is a place no one really wants to be. Your assessment is juvenile and self serving.
Haynesy’s first Trial ended in a Mistrial.
You’re saying the NSWDPP decided to try him again despite having no knowledge of the Mistrial jury numbers?
Some Mistrials are prosecuted again, some aren’t.
Assuming the Evidence is unc hanged, what criteria could there be for prosecuting again?
Ed, I was a juror in a case where the jury was ordered back by the judge 5 or 6 times due to one juror.
Uh huh.
That one juror was the only one holding out for Not Guilty, right?
Genius, remind us, what did the ACT DPP decide to do in the Lehrmann case?
The ACT DPP comes across as an idiot. Just goes to show they’re not that bright. He doesn’t present as the highly intelligent person you’d expect, or hope, would occupy that role. One can only assume he’s played a good political game over the years.
Still waiting for those bombshells about the ACT police.