The trouble is that previous convictions and information are not supposed to be taken into account in a trial, although we onlookers find the prior evidence compelling of course. The trial should only consider the evidence directly relevant to the case.
I guess you could have a situation where an innocent person, who was falsely convicted for some reason in a previous case, stands trial for a second similar case and the jury hears that he has a prior conviction. Obviously the jury will be tempted to convict for a second time. And so on.
- Forums
- Political Debate
- Pell Loses Appeal
Pell Loses Appeal, page-87
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 402 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Featured News
The Watchlist
RCE
RECCE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD
James Graham / Dr Alan Dunton, MD & CEO / Non-Executive Director
James Graham / Dr Alan Dunton
MD & CEO / Non-Executive Director
SPONSORED BY The Market Online