Scott Kuggeleijn sex trial
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bones" data-cid="602360" data-time="1470112899">
<div>
<p>Fuck me MN5, there is no thread you can't turn to 90s.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>If you think this is bad don't read anything by me about music and movies in the off topic section.</p> -
I thought Randle was completely exonerated and the whole thing was shown to be a sham.<br><br>
The worst one that slipped through the net was SA fast bowler Ntini. The judge convicted him and mentioned his version of events to be ridiculous. He was convicted and sentenced then 9 months later it disappeared and he became the black face of SA cricket.<br><br>
A simple ntini rape search on Google explains it all -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="602433" data-time="1470122603">
<div>
<p>I thought Randle was completely exonerated and the whole thing was shown to be a sham.<br><br>
The worst one that slipped through the net was SA fast bowler Ntini. The judge convicted him and mentioned his version of events to be ridiculous. He was convicted and sentenced then 9 months later it disappeared and he became the black face of SA cricket.<br><br>
A simple ntini rape search on Google explains it all</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>mud sticks and all...and I guess that is the issue isnt it, you get accused, named and shamed, then turns out you were innocent (or the complaint withdrawn - some would sy conveniently) doesnt stop the whispers, more so in todays digital age</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="602433" data-time="1470122603">
<div>
<p>I thought Randle was completely exonerated and the whole thing was shown to be a sham.<br><br>
The worst one that slipped through the net was SA fast bowler Ntini. The judge convicted him and mentioned his version of events to be ridiculous. He was convicted and sentenced then 9 months later it disappeared and he became the black face of SA cricket.<br><br>
A simple ntini rape search on Google explains it all</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I remember watching a BCs/Proteas ODI with a South African mate of mine years ago over a braai and few beers. We batted and Pollock got the first wicket and he was ecstatic but when Ntini got one he cursed him for being a "fucken kaffir rapist".....</p> -
Jury has been out a while. Must be a close run thing. Wonder if it'll end up hung, and if it did, would the Crown ask for a retrial?
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602454" data-time="1470124892"><p>
I remember watching a BCs/Proteas ODI with a South African mate of mine years ago over a braai and few beers. We batted and Pollock got the first wicket and he was ecstatic but when Ntini got one he cursed him for being a "fucken kaffir rapist".....</p></blockquote>
<br>
Top bloke. -
They must have been fairly well split. Normally if they're close (9-3, 10-2 etc) the judge will direct that they carry on, and then explore the possibility of a majority verdict.
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="aucklandwarlord" data-cid="602715" data-time="1470193467">
<div>
<p>They must have been fairly well split. Normally if they're close (9-3, 10-2 etc) the judge will direct that they carry on, and then explore the possibility of a majority verdict.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>At what does the judge accept that the jury is hung. If he continues sending them back to deliberate or even consider a majority verdict at some point the dissenting side of the jury will capitulate just to get things over with - which is hardly an ideal verdict from the jury.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I find it unlikely than a jury of 8 men and 4 women will swiftly find him guilty based on what we've seen. But I wouldn't be surprised if a majority find him guilty. The situation sounds too messy to be a quick, unanimous guilty verdict. If 8 random posters on here were the 8 men on the jury, it doesn't seem like a guilty verdict would be reached? At least in the first day of deliberation.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Is a bench trial an option in NZ if there is a retrial?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rotated" data-cid="602717" data-time="1470195505"><p>
At what does the judge accept that the jury is hung. If he continues sending them back to deliberate or even consider a majority verdict at some point the dissenting side of the jury will capitulate just to get things over with - which is hardly an ideal verdict from the jury.<br><br>
I find it unlikely than a jury of 8 men and 4 women will swiftly find him guilty based on what we've seen. But I wouldn't be surprised if a majority find him guilty. The situation sounds too messy to be a quick, unanimous guilty verdict. If 8 random posters on here were the 8 men on the jury, it doesn't seem like a guilty verdict would be reached? At least in the first day of deliberation.<br><br>
Is a bench trial an option in NZ if there is a retrial?</p></blockquote>
<br>
I think it's a "how long is a piece of string" type thing. If they had 9 in favour of one verdict and a couple on the fence with one steadfastly the other way, they'd probably be told to keep trying. But if they had 6 apiece and no one was looking like budging, the judge may just rule hung jury. <br><br>
In any case, not a good result for either party. The complainant will in all likelihood have to be cross examined again at a subsequent trial, and Kuggeleijn (sp?) Has to have it hanging over his head for probably another 6 months. I guess still a better result for him then a guilty verdict and a one way trip to the big house... -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Don Frye" data-cid="602714" data-time="1470193268">
<div>
<p>Top bloke.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Well actually he is but I think he was particularly worked up by that case and the "k" word just kinda came out.</p> -
At the second time of asking the jury quickly acquitted Kuggeleijn. A messy one again but it came down to consent and the jury believed he was given it regardless of pressure to act. The right outcome I think but I'm sure Scott will be super careful next time. A written consent form might be best.....
-
Interesting that the second jury acquitted him so quickly. It was an odd case in that the female seemed clearly and uncontrollably upset immediately after, he sent an apology text message, but that she was happy to fool around with him sexually earlier in the night.
Probably the right verdict in my opinion. Just too much doubt to be able to destroy someone's future by convicting and imprisoning them.
That said, when you get up on the stand and day "I thought she was up for it because she was wearing a short skirt", you're probably not gonna be NZ's most favourite sportsman.
-
@aucklandwarlord no real winner on the day as they say.....
