I wonder if they have any trouble finding a jury. If I had been called to Jury service for this I would find it hard to be completely impartial even if the alleged victim had been someone I knew nothing about. I think many people will at least be aware of his previous character and although that should legally have no bearing for a lot of people it is bound to influence their judgement
Its a tricky one no problem discussing the progress of the case on here but big problem with anyone discussing guilt or otherwise
Am wondering why his legal team didn't appeal for a neutral location - it has been known. EDIT: Unless they will use that as the opening gambit for any appeal?
I’d have thought it was fairly common for defendants to have a ‘reputation’ and that the judge will advise the jury accordingly. In this case it’s also possible that his previous character may be disclosed, I’m no expert, but surely if he tries a defence of ‘this accusation is so far removed from the defendants good character’ then he’d be opening himself up to have that assertion challenged. However I am not a lawyer, though I did used to watch Rumpole
Prosecution has finished opening. The incident isn't on video but video shows Barton running after Stendel in the tunnel and then the tunnel shaking. Nathan Kirby (our performance analyst) will apparently give evidence that he saw Barton run after Stendel and deliberately push him. Stendel will give evidence via video link tomorrow morning.
This was the gist of what I thought had happened, fits in with the tweets in the immediate aftermath. Interesting that Barton said he hadn't touched him and had no knowledge of the injuries Daniel sustained when he was interviewed by the Barnsley police and just answered no comment.
Will be interesting to see what the defence do with this. Not many routes opening to em to be honest. Was a lesser charge put before the defendant at any time?
Yes without a doubt. The defence wouldn't want you, however a judge could argue that this isn't about football. Its about rule of law, if a joiner was sitting trail a fellow tradesman wouldn't be exempt. However I think a judge may use a bit of sense on this one lol! He would compel the jury to remember though that this isn't about football, job titles mean nothing. Wearing a tarn shirt and scarf in the court probably wouldn't be recommended though.
You couldn't be impartial though could you? lol - constantly shouting tw@ during the trial would probably get you done for contempt anyway!!
Tripped and fell into him , is my guess ...surprised it’s got this far to be honest , he must have been a right knob when he was interviewed by the Police
Don't think he can say that if he made a statement saying he would have known if he'd touched him and that he hadn't.
He’s already had the story put out that he was provoked (scattergun as I said previously). So pretending it was an accident, when he’s chased someone shouting abuse, which he says was in direct response to the victims behaviour isn’t going to convince a jury.
IF I'd shoved someone and didn't want to get done for it it would be a whoops so sorry I didn't mean to barge into you I tripped! Looks like that isn't his line of defence though.