|
HTJ posted:The opening is a summary of the allegations and the key bits of evidence; after this they will go into the evidence in mind numbing detail. Keep in mind that as David Allen Green points out, the defendants all knew this was coming and still chose to plead not-guilty. Prosecution cases always look strong when they open, it'll be interesting to see what case they run.
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:26 |
|
|
The problem is the conflation of press ethics/libel laws and the phone hacking scandal, which was a problem with how Leveson was set up. The former is a tricky area with harms on all sides and no obviously correct answer, the latter is largely resolved by reforming the police and not the media. The real scandal of the phone hacking revelations is that the police were taking kickbacks at all levels from the media in exchange for stories and then for obvious reasons not investigating the media when it looked like they'd been up to other illegal things.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 14:14
|
|
|
HortonNash posted:Blunkett recorded Coulson making the blackmail attempt. That's not blackmail, that's putting a story to the subject of it before publication. Obviously done in an aggressive way, but unless the newspaper is worried about an emergency call to the duty judge and a super-injunction being slapped on them as they are going to press that should really be best practice. In an ideal world everyone would get a phone call before someone ran a story about them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
thehustler posted:Will anybody be done for perjury during Leveson based on evidence that comes out in the trial? You generally don't bother with perjury as a separate charge when someone lies in their own defence, the judge will just take it into account during sentencing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2014 11:53
|
|