Chat Forum
It is currently Fri Jul 03, 2020 8:52 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 878
So is the defence's case that McCullum (among others), enjoying an unbelievable career high as one of the most respected players and captains in the world, has, on a whim, decided to perjure himself?

I appreciate that the defence lawyer's just doing a job and all that, but it's a f**king batshit case to put forward.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:57 pm
Posts: 11170
When that is all you have got, you have to try.

So sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 878
(I know fudge all about law beyond watching Judge John Deed as a kid).

Can the judge instruct to convict?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 9:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5924
Cairns is toast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1618
Location: London
To be honest I couldn't believe he won the first case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 878
I see the defence has queried why no criminal charges have been brought against Lou Vincent.

I'm amazed no one shouted 'because he wasn't mind-numbingly stupid enough to sue someone for calling him a match-fixer.'

Though sad for the game, there's something comical about the fact that Cairns could have got away with it if he hadn't rushed to defend his reputation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 11:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11820
Location: Austin, TX
jabberwocky wrote:
I see the defence has queried why no criminal charges have been brought against Lou Vincent.

I'm amazed no one shouted 'because he wasn't mind-numbingly stupid enough to sue someone for calling him a match-fixer.'

Though sad for the game, there's something comical about the fact that Cairns could have got away with it if he hadn't rushed to defend his reputation.


Carins has a massive ego. Bellends like him always proclaim their innocence because they think they're somehow immune from the rules. Look at Lance Armstrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 653
when he starting frantically frothing due to what was, in the grand scheme of things, a fairly innocuous comment, you had to immediately wondered if he doth protest too much

but the defence has been to insinuate and slander anyone they can in the hope some shit sticks... it really smacks of desperation

he takes the stand next week... and i'd say, as far as committing perjury is concerned - he's only just gotten warmed up


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 2:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4349
jabberwocky wrote:
I see the defence has queried why no criminal charges have been brought against Lou Vincent.

I'm amazed no one shouted 'because he wasn't mind-numbingly stupid enough to sue someone for calling him a match-fixer.'

Though sad for the game, there's something comical about the fact that Cairns could have got away with it if he hadn't rushed to defend his reputation.


Easy to say in retrospect but it was a damning comment and surely wouldve effected his career, but more importantly obviously wasnt expecting vincent to come clean

From what i can gather vincent will be facing charges at some point


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 2:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1350
don't be surprised if he gets off
it's not easy to show proof beyond a reasonable doubt with just testimony


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 2:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16942
Location: Perth
vintage_cox wrote:
don't be surprised if he gets off
it's not easy to show proof beyond a reasonable doubt with just testimony


It's not?

fwiw, McCallum knew of match fixing and then silently sat on the information for years, yeah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1350
He's clearly guilty and will probably go down

but don't be surprised if the jury can't find enough evidence to convict, without a smoking gun like some records of payment or something written or recorded, all the defense has to do is cast the smallest bit of doubt on the testimony of a bunch of cricketers
I guess it will depend on whether a juror is gullible enough to believe that it's all some conspiracy by Modi to get back at Cairns (they don't even have to believe it, if they think it's a possibility then there's your doubt)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16942
Location: Perth
vintage_cox wrote:
He's clearly guilty and will probably go down

but don't be surprised if the jury can't find enough evidence to convict, without a smoking gun like some records of payment or something written or recorded, all the defense has to do is cast the smallest bit of doubt on the testimony of a bunch of cricketers
I guess it will depend on whether a juror is gullible enough to believe that it's all some conspiracy by Modi to get back at Cairns (they don't even have to believe it, if they think it's a possibility then there's your doubt)


Fair enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
The problem is both Vincent and McCullum have multiple other people who can back up elements of their stories. Whereas Cairns defence amounts to "They're lying for some reason".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Posts: 16942
Location: Perth
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
The problem is both Vincent and McCullum have multiple other people who can back up elements of their stories. Whereas Cairns defence amounts to "They're lying for some reason".


The issue with McCallum is that he's pretty much admitted to knowing about match fixing and not telling the authorities. He cracked down on on-field sledging though which is the important too.

This could get ugly. I'm not for a second suspecting McCallum of being involved with any rorting; however if he was approached openly by Cairns, how many others were? How big is this issue? If Cairns goes down and jail is threatened, this could get really ugly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 11:40 pm
Posts: 565
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Cairns is going to be wailing and crying like a little bitch when he takes the stand.

Expect megalomaniac descriptions of the 'dark forces' and 'evil liars' that have spewed forth from the very maws of hell...before crying and speaking in a hysterical high pitched voice at the first hint of a tough question.

I wish Campbell Live was still on air so Cairns could be a guest and do one of those fake tearful confessions and beg for forgiveness because he was lead astray...blah blah blah...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4139
towny wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
The problem is both Vincent and McCullum have multiple other people who can back up elements of their stories. Whereas Cairns defence amounts to "They're lying for some reason".


The issue with McCallum is that he's pretty much admitted to knowing about match fixing and not telling the authorities. He cracked down on on-field sledging though which is the important too.

This could get ugly. I'm not for a second suspecting McCallum of being involved with any rorting; however if he was approached openly by Cairns, how many others were? How big is this issue? If Cairns goes down and jail is threatened, this could get really ugly.


It's McCullum. It's even correct in the post you've quoted. Is your brain stored in one of your spindly calves?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
towny wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
The problem is both Vincent and McCullum have multiple other people who can back up elements of their stories. Whereas Cairns defence amounts to "They're lying for some reason".


The issue with McCallum is that he's pretty much admitted to knowing about match fixing and not telling the authorities.


And that's an issue for another day. But as far as Cairns' case is concerned, the fact that McCullum told loads of other people about it, and inded the fact that he's testifying now which is actually not even in his own interests (due to the penalties for not reporting it at the time) at the time lends weight to McCullum's story.

If it was just Vincent saying it, Cairns could maybe point to Vincent's depression, alchohol problems etc. Add in McCullum's testimony and Cairns is fukt.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
But I am actually interested in Towny's point (even if I suspect a bit of Kiwi trolling) as to whether others were approached.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8736
Feel very sorry for Lance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:58 am
Posts: 3353
sounds bad for cairns but really all the evidence has been nothing but circumstantial. no way should he be found guilty on what the prosecution has produced so far.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12659
Location: Coalfalls
SecretAgentMan wrote:
Feel very sorry for Lance.


Yep. And you've plenty of company in that.

A great and fair competitor was Cairns Snr.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 10:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
Kahu wrote:
sounds bad for cairns but really all the evidence has been nothing but circumstantial. no way should he be found guilty on what the prosecution has produced so far.


Really? Two witnesses, both with multiple supporting witnesses that back up elements of their testimony, providing two unrelated stories of Cairns fixing?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:58 am
Posts: 3353
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Kahu wrote:
sounds bad for cairns but really all the evidence has been nothing but circumstantial. no way should he be found guilty on what the prosecution has produced so far.


Really? Two witnesses, both with multiple supporting witnesses that back up elements of their testimony, providing two unrelated stories of Cairns fixing?

i'm no conspiracy theorist (well i am sometimes) but stranger things have happened, unless their is a smoking gun i couldn't possibly find him guilty.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
Kahu wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Kahu wrote:
sounds bad for cairns but really all the evidence has been nothing but circumstantial. no way should he be found guilty on what the prosecution has produced so far.


Really? Two witnesses, both with multiple supporting witnesses that back up elements of their testimony, providing two unrelated stories of Cairns fixing?

i'm no conspiracy theorist (well i am sometimes) but stranger things have happened, unless their is a smoking gun i couldn't possibly find him guilty.


Probably the problem with using something as subjective as 'reasonable' doubt. I wouldn't regard your viewpoint as reasonable doubt, personally, but I know I'm pretty cynical.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1350
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
towny wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
The problem is both Vincent and McCullum have multiple other people who can back up elements of their stories. Whereas Cairns defence amounts to "They're lying for some reason".


The issue with McCallum is that he's pretty much admitted to knowing about match fixing and not telling the authorities.


And that's an issue for another day. But as far as Cairns' case is concerned, the fact that McCullum told loads of other people about it, and inded the fact that he's testifying now which is actually not even in his own interests (due to the penalties for not reporting it at the time) at the time lends weight to McCullum's story.

If it was just Vincent saying it, Cairns could maybe point to Vincent's depression, alchohol problems etc. Add in McCullum's testimony and Cairns is fukt.

Not so fast, I reckon this is exactly the point the defense will try to hammer to discredit Baz. They'll point to the whole situation stinking to high heaven and try to cast some aspersions on the whole cricket establishment. Poor, old, yesterday's news Cairns is being made some sort of scapegoat while the dashing international captain and IPL star comes out looking relatively squeaky clean, just a naive young buck too starstruck to rat on his idol. You could certainly argue that is in the game's best interest (and the many powerful, wealthy stakeholders) that Cairns goes down while McCullum stays right where he is, with all of his mates rallied around him


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1350
But I want to make it clear I don't for a second think that is the case, Cairns is guilty


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16008
It's incredibly sad to see Canterbury's Chris Cairns go down like this. I wouldn't wish his fate on anybody.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
vintage_cox wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
towny wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
The problem is both Vincent and McCullum have multiple other people who can back up elements of their stories. Whereas Cairns defence amounts to "They're lying for some reason".


The issue with McCallum is that he's pretty much admitted to knowing about match fixing and not telling the authorities.


And that's an issue for another day. But as far as Cairns' case is concerned, the fact that McCullum told loads of other people about it, and inded the fact that he's testifying now which is actually not even in his own interests (due to the penalties for not reporting it at the time) at the time lends weight to McCullum's story.

If it was just Vincent saying it, Cairns could maybe point to Vincent's depression, alchohol problems etc. Add in McCullum's testimony and Cairns is fukt.

Not so fast, I reckon this is exactly the point the defense will try to hammer to discredit Baz. They'll point to the whole situation stinking to high heaven and try to cast some aspersions on the whole cricket establishment. Poor, old, yesterday's news Cairns is being made some sort of scapegoat while the dashing international captain and IPL star comes out looking relatively squeaky clean, just a naive young buck too starstruck to rat on his idol. You could certainly argue that is in the game's best interest (and the many powerful, wealthy stakeholders) that Cairns goes down while McCullum stays right where he is, with all of his mates rallied around him


How exactly does McCullum coming forward now - and thus confirming that he didn't come forward previously - benefit him though? No one is suggesting (and Cairns lawyers certainly aren't going to) that McCullum was actually involved in any match or spot fixing so the worst thing he could be accused of is the thing that he's admitting freely. It's gonna take a bloody convincing argument to bring the jury around to the idea that both McCullum and Vincent are implicating themselves just to get Cairns.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16008
Is this a jury trial, or judge only?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
Tehui wrote:
Is this a jury trial, or judge only?


It's a criminal trial, surely it's a jury?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16008
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Tehui wrote:
Is this a jury trial, or judge only?


It's a criminal trial, surely it's a jury?


Just looked it up. Jury trial.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1350
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
How exactly does McCullum coming forward now - and thus confirming that he didn't come forward previously - benefit him though? No one is suggesting (and Cairns lawyers certainly aren't going to) that McCullum was actually involved in any match or spot fixing so the worst thing he could be accused of is the thing that he's admitting freely. It's gonna take a bloody convincing argument to bring the jury around to the idea that both McCullum and Vincent are implicating themselves just to get Cairns.


Well what I've said is obviously insane and they'll come up with something more believable but they clearly have some belief that they have a shot at defending this, otherwise it wouldn't have gone to trial. Surely he's not that proud or stubborn...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5688
Location: Florida
has there been any evidence of money being paid


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
argus wrote:
has there been any evidence of money being paid


I don't think they were dumb enough to leave a trail. The only reference to money changing hands I've heard is some guy who says he was with Vincent when he had a bag of money deposited in the boot of his car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5688
Location: Florida
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
argus wrote:
has there been any evidence of money being paid


I don't think they were dumb enough to leave a trail. The only reference to money changing hands I've heard is some guy who says he was with Vincent when he had a bag of money deposited in the boot of his car.


that is all i have seen as well

seems unreasonable, considering the amounts they are discussing, that it is all in cash

discussion about buying property in dubai,etc - would there not be some transactions or assets they can point to that shows money was spent ? Fancy car, property, exotic holidays , leather jacket ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17491
argus wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
argus wrote:
has there been any evidence of money being paid


I don't think they were dumb enough to leave a trail. The only reference to money changing hands I've heard is some guy who says he was with Vincent when he had a bag of money deposited in the boot of his car.


that is all i have seen as well

seems unreasonable, considering the amounts they are discussing, that it is all in cash

discussion about buying property in dubai,etc - would there not be some transactions or assets they can point to that shows money was spent ? Fancy car, property, exotic holidays , leather jacket ?


From memory, the most Vincent received was $50k per match and he didn't get paid for some of them. Though I do wonder if that whole Vettori diamond thing was intended by the prosecution to show that there were less visible ways money could change hands.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Achahoish, bimboman, Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Lenny and 39 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group