Sevco Thread

[Fridge]

That you tell the truth and don’t try and get someone off who you know is guilty.

 

Everyone should be entitled to a defence of course and should be made clear the circumstances behind say the assault etc but when they come out with some outrageous pish that he didn’t mean to glass the guy, the pint slipped out of his hand or some nonsense it pisses me off.

[The Buzzard]

They learned the square root of fuck all since they died and came back as a new club. Bought their way through the leagues and think they’re actually going to compete with Celtic, more arrogant than they were before, so fuck them indeed

Yep. I can't believe that there wasn't at least one person in that club when it all went tits up not having the forethought to think that this might actually be a chance to maybe do things differently, and a bit more sustainably. Brain dead.

[strachanmcgheegoal]

I understand their model (basically blatant exploitation of mug emotion). It annoys me that they didn’t, and disgusts me that the authorities wouldn’t, consider that there might just be another way.

 

Our games fucked as a result but it’ll be masked as the end of the journey, 55, TIAR and hopefully another Big Bang plays out. But utterly shite for the rest of us. And to view the Tim’s supportive role in it all has been enlightening.

[1903Fitba]

SH Talking sense shocker.

[manboobs109]

Nonsense. Lawyers, QC's etc know for a fact that some of the people they defend are guilty and yet we pay them to try and get dangerous people back out on the streets. If they want to defend rapists, murderers etc then they should be paid by the people they are defending.

[eeps]

Nonsense. Lawyers, QC's etc know for a fact that some of the people they defend are guilty and yet we pay them to try and get dangerous people back out on the streets. If they want to defend rapists, murderers etc then they should be paid by the people they are defending.

Nope, SH correct, everyone has a right to a defence. If PF decide to prosecute they have the full weight of the state behind them, accused have fuck all.

[Don Fonte]

Nonsense. Lawyers, QC's etc know for a fact that some of the people they defend are guilty and yet we pay them to try and get dangerous people back out on the streets. If they want to defend rapists, murderers etc then they should be paid by the people they are defending.

Terrible fishing expedition

[V for Vendetta]

Hard to know if manboobs is fishing, he genuinely comes across as the thickest person on the whole of the internet.

[Redforever86]

Hard to know if manboobs is fishing, he genuinely comes across as the thickest person on the whole of the internet.

What about his mental ability?

[manboobs109]

Nope, SH correct, everyone has a right to a defence. If PF decide to prosecute they have the full weight of the state behind them, accused have fuck all.

If there is genuine doubt then yes but lawyers, QC's etc will attempt to get people off from things that they know for a fact that they have done them. I've been involved in a case before where someone was stabbed and it was caught on CCTV. The defence attempted to have the CCTV evidence ruled as inadmissible because it had been shared on WhatsApp among people who worked at the place the CCTV had been in. So the defence lawyers had watched video footage of someone stabbing someone and instead of thinking 'maybe best this boy pleads guilty' they think 'how can I get this boy off' all paid for by the taxpayer at ludicrously inflated fees. It's a total farce. If the want to defend these people they can recover the costs from the people themselves, if not they can work pro bono.

[V for Vendetta]

If there is genuine doubt then yes but lawyers, QC's etc will attempt to get people off from things that they know for a fact that they have done them. I've been involved in a case before where someone was stabbed and it was caught on CCTV. The defence attempted to have the CCTV evidence ruled as inadmissible because it had been shared on WhatsApp among people who worked at the place the CCTV had been in. So the defence lawyers had watched video footage of someone stabbing someone and instead of thinking 'maybe best this boy pleads guilty' they think 'how can I get this boy off' all paid for by the taxpayer at ludicrously inflated fees. It's a total farce. If the want to defend these people they can recover the costs from the people themselves, if not they can work pro bono.

Ffs clueless

[manboobs109]

Nope I blame the person who was deliberately attempting to deceive the court, something they are not supposed to do.

[Tommy]

Nope I blame the person who was deliberately attempting to deceive the court, something they are not supposed to do.

Do they not ‘promise to tell the truth’ in court nowadays?

I just don’t get how a defence lawyer can try and get someone off when they know their client is guilty.

Obviously they have no morals.

[The Boofon]

Do they not ‘promise to tell the truth’ in court nowadays?

I just don’t get how a defence lawyer can try and get someone off when they know their client is guilty.

Obviously they have no morals.

 

 

Or they ask questions that might be answered incorrectly by the prosecution.

 

As shite as it is the fact remains that you have to prove someone's guilty. (Unless they're a hun) The solicitor is only saying what the defence tells him happened so he's not bullshitting. Only the defendant is bullshitting.

[Studebaker-90]

I dread to think what our society would be like without lawyers. Over zealous police officers pushing for prosecution on potentially innocent people. Police aren’t on your side, they are out to get a conviction. They couldn’t care less if you innocent or not. If they can stick you for something they will. Thank Christ for briefs I say.

[eeps]

I dread to think what our society would be like without lawyers. Over zealous police officers pushing for prosecution on potentially innocent people. Police aren’t on your side, they are out to get a conviction. They couldn’t care less if you innocent or not. If they can stick you for something they will. Thank Christ for briefs I say.

Exactly, loads of folk getting stitched up due to ever rising restrictions on legal aid. That's the scandal not defence lawyers doing their job

[manboobs109]

I dread to think what our society would be like without lawyers. Over zealous police officers pushing for prosecution on potentially innocent people. Police aren’t on your side, they are out to get a conviction. They couldn’t care less if you innocent or not. If they can stick you for something they will. Thank Christ for briefs I say.

What a load of pish. Obviously some innocent folk get done but the police would obviously want to get the right person. Can you honestly say you believe the police don't care if they get the wrong person for a murder or rape etc?

[Don Fonte]

What a load of pish. Obviously some innocent folk get done but the police would obviously want to get the right person. Can you honestly say you believe the police don't care if they get the wrong person for a murder or rape etc?

I think the truth is somewhere in between both your views.

[Studebaker-90]

Why is it obvious that they would want to get the right person? If they get a conviction it’s job done. Now obviously that’s not all of the police force however I’d say it’s the attitude a lot of them hold. It might not be their fault I might add. They are ridiculously understaffed and probably don’t have the time to investigate everything thoroughly.

[manboobs109]

They’re not deceiving anyone . They are working within a legal framework .

They are deceiving someone. In the case I was involved in they tried to suppress concrete evidence that they had seen in order to get someone off as it would've come down to weaker evidence. They were trying to deceive a jury that their client was innocent even though they knew for a fact he wasn't. Happens every day in courts up and down the land. We pay the ludicrously inflated fees for it all as well.

[manboobs109]

Why is it obvious that they would want to get the right person? If they get a conviction it’s job done. Now obviously that’s not all of the police force however I’d say it’s the attitude a lot of them hold. It might not be their fault I might add. They are ridiculously understaffed and probably don’t have the time to investigate everything thoroughly.

So a policeman investigating a murder would rather invent evidence to frame an innocent man rather than follow evidence that exists to convict a murderer? You're havering.

[Studebaker-90]

What you’re doing is using an extreme example to undermine the entirety of my argument. I know first hand people that have been charged with stuff that they didn’t have anything to do with simply because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time. I didn’t say anything about inventing evidence. More to do with interviewing people under duress to try and get a confession.

[manboobs109]

^ did they have to go to court?

[Don Fonte]

^ did they have to go to court?

I went to court for something I didn't do (smashing a shop window), purely because I was wearing the same top as the perpetrator and in the area at a similar time. The cops were adamant it was me as they had CCTV evidence. Got thrown out of court.

[manboobs109]

I've a strangely similar story! I did it though.

[Studebaker-90]

^ did they have to go to court?

Yep. Got thrown out though.

[Fridge]

My view on it is that your lawyer should get you the best deal they can, that’s what you pay them for however they should not be making up utter bullshit.

 

Look at OJ Simpson etc getting off with blatant murder because he had a lawyer that he could afford and find loopholes.

[Hoppy]

Anyway, back to Sevco...

[The Boofon]

They are deceiving someone. In the case I was involved in they tried to suppress concrete evidence that they had seen in order to get someone off as it would've come down to weaker evidence. They were trying to deceive a jury that their client was innocent even though they knew for a fact he wasn't. Happens every day in courts up and down the land. We pay the ludicrously inflated fees for it all as well.

Sounds more like a civil case. @@Parklife

[The Boofon]

I went to court for something I didn't do (smashing a shop window), purely because I was wearing the same top as the perpetrator and in the area at a similar time. The cops were adamant it was me as they had CCTV evidence. Got thrown out of court.

Did you have to go up on the “stand and deliver” your evidence?