0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
He needs to lie low until he's won his appeal, which he will win. Not sure how long the appeal will take though, maybe that's why he's in such a rush to get a contract somewhere.
Quote from: nice one rovers on January 11, 2015, 11:55:16 amHe needs to lie low until he's won his appeal, which he will win. Not sure how long the appeal will take though, maybe that's why he's in such a rush to get a contract somewhere.Like he won his last appeal?He was found guilty by a jury of his peers It was referred to the court of appeal and THREE judges upheld the verdict as David conn in the guardian pointed for those who go to appeal at the next level the success rate is 7% I would not hold your breath on his chances
Quote from: bedale rover on January 11, 2015, 12:26:35 pmQuote from: nice one rovers on January 11, 2015, 11:55:16 amHe needs to lie low until he's won his appeal, which he will win. Not sure how long the appeal will take though, maybe that's why he's in such a rush to get a contract somewhere.Like he won his last appeal?He was found guilty by a jury of his peers It was referred to the court of appeal and THREE judges upheld the verdict as David conn in the guardian pointed for those who go to appeal at the next level the success rate is 7% I would not hold your breath on his chancesSorry, I had meant to put "will probably win", not "will win".
dont wish to argue bpool but it wasnt an appeal court it was three judges sticking up for their mate and refused the right to appeal,if they had allowed the appeal originally we probably wouldnt be having this debate
the difference here IDM i beleave the laws as they stand,might not like some but have to put up with it ,in your case you only beleave the bits of the law you like.
THERE WAS NO APPEAL PROCEDURE,3 judgesdecided to deny an appeal,