Lazarus wrote:alexjones wrote:Lazarus wrote:alexjones wrote:Wrongful convictions have near plummeted with the onset of DNA testing in the 1980s/1990s.
I do agree that the court system is a game. The court has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the alleged. So the more money one has the greater the likelihood of casting that doubt. I myself was charged with 2 offences once and it cost me 25 grand in lawyer and queen council barrister fees and nearly 9 months to create the doubt which led to the magistrate acquitting me of the charges. If I had not of spent that 25 grand I do not know enough about the law and I would of been convicted of the charges.
Lawyers are the true winners as they make an absolute killing.
So, does that mean you didn't actually prove you were innocent, just put some shade on their case?
My understanding of the law(in QLD at least) is its not a matter of proving innocence but the police(prosecutor) having to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The queens council barrister taught me that you can commit a crime and not be found guilty due to "reasonable excuse".
So as an example trespassing/failure to leave a licensed venue and disorderly conduct/offensive behaviour is ilegal. However due to having the freedom to protest it can be considered reasonable to trespass. And disorderly conduct/offensive behavior is hard to prove because they are objective terms that a reasonable person may not find offensive. Hurting a police officer feelings is not a crime.
Sometimes the police charge you with the wrong crime as well. So whilst you may have committed disorderly conduct the police charged you with offensive behaviour or public nuisance. So the magistrate has to acquit you because whilst you may have committed a crime you did not commit the crime you are being charged with.
The law is technical as F and contains so much red tape. Remember the 8000 police in Victoria who were not properly sworn in and thus not technically cops? A few crims got let out of jail because technically they were held against their will by people who were not police. Those 8000 police opened carried firearms without an exemption and thus were in ilegal possession of a firearm in a public place.
Yeah, it is a sh!t show.
The basis of my question though, was is there jeopardy attached?
Can they come at you again on the same issue?
That would be a concern
In my situation No. They can not appeal. I was acquitted and thus have a clean background check.