Giggs trial

[RedDevilRoshi]

Very unsurprising. Just like Greenwood & Mendy, shows you what money and a very expensive lawyer can do for you.

 

[Giggsy13]

The sooner these trials are played out as far from the public eye as possible, the better for all involved.

The only time we as the public should know anything is when a guilty verdict is handed down.

These cases inevitably ruin the reputation of the accused to the point their career and ability to earn a living has been permanently compromised. Names shouldn’t be discussed in public until the charges have played out to avoid mob who rarely understand the basic tenets of the criminal justice system.

 

[mctrials23]

The Jury failed to convict the first time and the Crown has withdrawn the case. How is it unresolved?

I think he means that when a case is dropped it often has little bearing on the actual truth of the matter. I have been a juror where I was pretty damn sure the oiks committed the crime but there wasn't enough to convict them. There is some difference between what you think you know and what can be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[moses]

These cases inevitably ruin the reputation of the accused to the point their career and ability to earn a living has been permanently compromised. Names shouldn’t be discussed in public until the charges have played out to avoid mob who rarely understand the basic tenets of the criminal justice system.

Giggs' reputation was already in the gutter?!

 

[Giggsy13]

Very unsurprising. Just like Greenwood & Mendy, shows you what money and a very expensive lawyer can do for you.

Defend their clients vigorously in Court? The gall of their barristers, how dare they do their job.

 

[Giggsy13]

Giggs' reputation was already in the gutter?!

Terrible brother yes, but being branded a criminal is another matter.

 

[Bwuk]

The sooner these trials are played out as far from the public eye as possible, the better for all involved.

The only time we as the public should know anything is when a guilty verdict is handed down.

Agreed entirely.

We don't know the ins and outs of this case, but I can guarantee that the general public will act like he was guilty of it all.

 

[quadrant]

The Jury failed to convict the first time and the Crown has withdrawn the case. How is it unresolved?

The first jury couldn't reach a verdict one way or another, and a case being dropped by the CPS doesn't mean the person is innocent, cases get dropped for all sorts of reasons.

 

[Pickle85]

Defend their clients vigorously in Court? The gall of their barristers, how dare they do their job.

It feels like you're maybe a little biased on this one. I don't think anyone is claiming Giggs is categorically guilty but it's definitely worth noting the regularity with which 'stars' get away with this sort of thing vs the general public. Whichever way you cut it, Giggs does not come out of this incident looking good. Nor does anyone that steadfastly refuses to admit the possibility of any wrongdoing on his part, imo.

 

[sepulturite]

The first jury couldn't reach a verdict one way or another, and a case being dropped by the CPS doesn't mean the person is innocent, cases get dropped for all sorts of reasons.

Your wasting your time, there's certain posters on here who seem to think footballer's can do no wrong.

 

[Escobar]

Very unsurprising. Just like Greenwood & Mendy, shows you what money and a very expensive lawyer can do for you.

Thats one way to look at it

 

[Champ]

The first jury couldn't reach a verdict one way or another, and a case being dropped by the CPS doesn't mean the person is innocent, cases get dropped for all sorts of reasons.

Also doesn't mean he is guilty.

 

[RaddyRed]

One of the arguments the couple had was about loading the cutlery the correct way into the dishwasher. Did we ever find out which way Ryan likes them loaded?

I'm a cutlery facing down man personally. Never had any issues.

 

[moses]

Also doesn't mean he is guilty.

Nobody said he was. But it's more nuanced than just the guilty / innocent binary.
Whoever doesn't understand that should probably stay out of these threads.

The stupidity, whether actual or tactical is getting tiresome.

 

[quadrant]

Also doesn't mean he is guilty.

Which is why I said it feels unresolved.

 

[SuperiorXI]

One of the arguments the couple had was about loading the cutlery the correct way into the dishwasher. Did we ever find out which way Ryan likes them loaded?

I'm a cutlery facing down man personally. Never had any issues.

If the cutlery is facing down less water will get to the dirty bits as they're "protected" somewhat by the casing of the cutlery holder

Unless you eat with your cutlery the other way round in which case this method is perfectly viable

 

[Halftrack]

One of the arguments the couple had was about loading the cutlery the correct way into the dishwasher. Did we ever find out which way Ryan likes them loaded?

I'm a cutlery facing down man personally. Never had any issues.

Heresy! Cutlery up is the only way to ensure it gets properly cleaned.

 

[RaddyRed]

If the cutlery is facing down less water will get to the dirty bits as they're "protected" somewhat by the casing of the cutlery holder

Unless you eat with your cutlery the other way round in which case this method is perfectly viable

Quicker to load and unload, and always clean. Can see why the subject would turn violent tbf

 

[Champ]

Nobody said he was. But it's more nuanced than just the guilty / innocent binary.
Whoever doesn't understand that should probably stay out of these threads.

The stupidity, whether actual or tactical is getting tiresome.

The assumption was that just because the case was dropped doesn't mean he is innocent, which then paints an image of him being guilty by proxy whether that's deliberate or not.

 

[desertegil]

One of the arguments the couple had was about loading the cutlery the correct way into the dishwasher. Did we ever find out which way Ryan likes them loaded?

I'm a cutlery facing down man personally. Never had any issues.

Barbaric.

 

[Champ]

Which is why I said it feels unresolved.

It does, your right.

And I guess without knowing the full details of why it was dropped it potentially always will be.
But the case is closed as far as the law is concerned, and with no charges for Giggs he is in essence innocent man,

 

[stepic]

he's only been acquitted because kate didn't want to give further evidence because she's been 'worn down' and 'violated' by the process, right?

the legal process is fecked.

 

[Solius]

he's only been acquitted because kate didn't want to give evidence because she's been worn down and 'volated' by the process, right?

the legal process is fecked.

Yeah pretty grim. This kind of thing always drags on, must be exhausting.

 

[RedDevilRoshi]

Defend their clients vigorously in Court? The gall of their barristers, how dare they do their job.

You’re being a little biased and missing the obvious bigger point here on what I was referring too when it comes to “sports stars” in court with a ton of money at their disposal & who can afford to have the best of lawyers vs the general public who let’s be fair would very unlikely escape a jail sentence if they committed anything like what Greenwood/Mendy/Giggs had done.

 

[moses]

The assumption was that just because the case was dropped doesn't mean he is innocent, which then paints an image of him being guilty by proxy whether that's deliberate or not.

No, it's somewhere in the middle, that's the issue, and thus the use of 'unresolved' .

 

[Real Name]

Dropped case doesnt mean he cant get charged again if new evidence come up?

 

[Real Name]

Defend their clients vigorously in Court? The gall of their barristers, how dare they do their job.

Just like O.J. Simpson's lawyers.

 

[SuperiorXI]

Quicker to load and unload, and always clean. Can see why the subject would turn violent tbf

To the naked eye maybe, but at a microscopic bacterial level you're putting the equivalent of a pigs cock (after rolling round in shit all day) in your mouth the next time you eat with that cutlery

 

[Champ]

No, it's somewhere in the middle, that's the issue, and thus the use of 'unresolved' .

And I've agreed to that reasoning, however does Giggs have any charges on him right now? Has he commited a crime by the letter of the law?
Answer those in layman's terms and you have your resolve.
Does that resolve the situation, possibly not but it does resolve the case.

The state of innocent and guilty is binary, the idea of justice isn't binary.

 

[Pickle85]

To the naked eye maybe, but at a microscopic bacterial level you're putting the equivalent of a pigs cock (after rolling round in shit all day) in your mouth the next time you eat with that cutlery

The Giggs thread has taken an unexpected turn here...!

 

[RaddyRed]

To the naked eye maybe, but at a microscopic bacterial level you're putting the equivalent of a pigs cock (after rolling round in shit all day) in your mouth the next time you eat with that cutlery

Oooft. That could be a game changer

 

[quadrant]

It does, your right.

And I guess without knowing the full details of why it was dropped it potentially always will be.
But the case is closed as far as the law is concerned, and with no charges for Giggs he is in essence innocent man,

Well no, there's a distinction between Not Guilty and Innocent, that's the problem. Not Guilty can mean you're completely innocent, but it can also mean all sorts of other things, like being charged with the wrong offence, a lack of evidence, a split jury, and other technical issues. The process he's gone through has not proven his innocence.

 

[Red4Ever]

United twitter is embarrassing today (as always I guess)

 

[tenpoless]

Innocent until you or your cheap lawyers shit the bed should be the name of the game. The top ultra expensive lawyers though can twist things more than a tornado.

 

[11101]

Very unsurprising. Just like Greenwood & Mendy, shows you what money and a very expensive lawyer can do for you.

This is a different situation. They gave evidence the first time round but the mental toll meant they did not want to go through that a second time in the retrial.

With both Greenwood and Mendy, the evidence/witnesses were either lying or unwilling to cooperate from the start.

 

[RedC]

Lads, I'm sure we can all agree that @Giggsy13 is coming at this in a completely unbiased and objective way.

 

[Champ]

Well no, there's a distinction between Not Guilty and Innocent, that's the problem. Not Guilty can mean you're completely innocent, but it can also mean all sorts of other things, like being charged with the wrong offence, a lack of evidence, a split jury, and other technical issues. The process he's gone through has not proven his innocence.

Judge Hilary Manley directed that he was not guilty on all three counts,

By the letter of the law the man is innocent of all charges.
There's no in-between there, from the charges held against Giggs, he is innocent of all charges.

Now how that came about is the muddy waters, but that does not diminish the fact that Giggs is in society as an innocent man.

 

[Maagge]

I don't think so. I think he'll be well advised to stay away for a bit, let another controversy with someone else come out and then dip his toe back in.

Yes agreed, they'll get him in as an expert next time a Mendy or Greenwood shows up.

 

[Big Ben Foster]

To the naked eye maybe, but at a microscopic bacterial level you're putting the equivalent of a pigs cock (after rolling round in shit all day) in your mouth the next time you eat with that cutlery

Interesting.

I used to be a cutlery up guy but after reading your post will have to make the switch to cutlery down!

 

[ROFLUTION]

Innocent until you or your cheap lawyers shit the bed should be the name of the game. The top ultra expensive lawyers though can twist things more than a tornado.

Fairly sure Giggs’ ex is not skinned when it comes to money.