Ryan Giggs - Guilty or Innocent?

[Jedi boro]

Jury have been out too long for this to be a guilty verdict

I’m not so sure, as you could argue the opposite view.

What it does show is there is clearly a mixed view in the jury. So either way it’s not clear cut.

 

[Smog On The Medway]

Jury sent home again because one of them is ill!

 

[JackG]

Alot of trials are in the public interest though so there is no prospect of that changing any time soon. I would say even the Giggs trial could be classed as being in the public interest as there will be women up and down the country reading about the way he has treat her thinking "I get treat like that". Who knows, a high profile trial like this could be the tipping point for victims finally deciding to get out of an abusive relationship.

You could just as easily argue that fear of the consequent publicity could discourage victims from coming forward.

 

[Brian Marwood]

The judge will now accept a majority decision from the jury instead of unanimous.

 

[Jedi boro]

Jury discharged after failing to reach a verdict.

So is this a retrial or an acquittal then ??


https://news.sky.com/story/ryan-gig...lt-and-controlling-behaviour-charges-12685890Ryan Giggs trial: Jury discharged after failing to reach verdicts on assault and controlling behaviour charges

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

The prosecution will decide whether they want to go again.

 

[Ironops]

So what actually happens? He is free and technically not guilty and if there is no re-trial that’s the way it stays?

Retrial is not automatic?

 

[1finny]

So what actually happens? He is free and technically not guilty and if there is no re-trial that’s the way it stays?

Retrial is not automatic?

‘Technically not guilty’ is a cracking phrase.
More so after watching Prima Facie - the play written by a barrister about sexual abuse cases in UK.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

So what actually happens? He is free and technically not guilty and if there is no re-trial that’s the way it stays?

Retrial is not automatic?

Free? Yes, provided he is granted bail. CPS decides whether there is to be a retrial, with input from the victim. If there is no retrial he has not been acquitted or convicted. He's like Schrödinger's cat.

 

[Manhead]

If he is found guilty then I just wish his partner was Patel or truss and not some innocent bystander.

Wow.

 

[Centralscrutinizer]

Free? Yes, provided he is granted bail. CPS decides whether there is to be a retrial, with input from the victim. If there is no retrial he has not been acquitted or convicted. He's like Schrödinger's cat.

 

[Ironops]

Free? Yes, provided he is granted bail. CPS decides whether there is to be a retrial, with input from the victim. If there is no retrial he has not been acquitted or convicted. He's like Schrödinger's cat.

Schrodingers wife beater

 

[Jedi boro]

Who pays legal fee then

 

[Billy69_uk]

Schrodingers wife beater

The cat simultaneously has a black eye and also doesn't have a black eye.

 

[Ironops]

Who pays legal fee then

I guess he pays his own. I would assume hers are paid by the state

 

[MolteniArcore]

Good old British justice

 

[Muttley]

a significant difficulty in a case such as this involving a high profile adored figure to 50%+ of the city of manchester, is having the trial and the jury from the city of manchester.

Should have tried him in Liverpool?

Seriously though it is difficult to get a truly neutral jury for someone like Giggs, then you have the problem of much of the testimony being "he said" versus "she said" as I haven't heard all the evidence I'm in no position to make a judgement myself.

 

[Jedi boro]

I agree it’s crazy to host any such trial in Manchester.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

I agree it’s crazy to host any such trial in Manchester.

Let's face it they could have it in Devon and half the jury are going to be united fans. Manchester is probably the fairest place you could have it as half of them might at least be city fans to balance it out.

 

[Paintolerance]

Given what we all know of him, he is guilty of being a very unpleasant man. Beyond that, given the evidence placed in front of them, the jury hasn't been able to conclude he is anything worse. I doubt that has anything to do with one or two of them being rabid Man U fans.

Being a total sh*t is not against the law.