tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post3605846843650173033..comments2024-03-28T07:16:39.621+00:00Comments on Lallands Peat Worrier: The Sheridan Case II: The Implications of CorroborationLallands Peat Worrierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18276270498204697708noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-29260422722694396972010-12-22T21:48:46.512+00:002010-12-22T21:48:46.512+00:00Lord Bracadale had words about that today, he call...Lord Bracadale had words about that today, he called the subornation libel an "evidential charge" I leave it to the bewigged amongst us to deal with that.James Dolemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16774046346905734191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-62070924643936871372009-07-26T19:09:04.754+01:002009-07-26T19:09:04.754+01:00Well say, completely hypothetically, that a docume...Well say, completely hypothetically, that a document existed that laid out a proposed form of words and the documents origination could also be proved, that would be corroboration.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-30887516967561874242009-07-26T14:27:54.250+01:002009-07-26T14:27:54.250+01:00Anonymous,
Depending on what the document said, v...Anonymous,<br /><br />Depending on what the document said, very possibly. A diary for example, might suffice, or an e-mail correspondence. The crucial question is whether it would be capable of corroborating the crucial elements of the offence.Lallands Peat Worrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07238432265194046726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-83746386432030107332009-07-24T20:43:59.436+01:002009-07-24T20:43:59.436+01:00I've had endless fun being deleted off the Sco...I've had endless fun being deleted off the Scotsman just for mentioning other people called Sheridan since this got going!<br /><br />My take on it is this.<br /><br />He didn't do everything the NOTW claimed he did, and/or didn't do some things WHEN they said he did them.<br /><br />He could prove that, and as a result persuaded the jury that he hadn't done ANY of the things alleged (at least at the times alleged).<br /><br />But it always looked like he had done a few naughties - the testimony of the Danish psychiatric nurse (whom I shall not name) seemed credible, particularly since she maintained it after the verdict.<br /><br />("I was phoning her about the Danish minimum wage." "Denmark doesn't have a minimum wage, Tommy.")<br /><br />I'm really looking forward to some of the details.<br /><br />Could it be true that after a vigorous session of group sex in Glasgow, the People's Tommy really persuaded his partners to get into a car and drive for 3+ hours to Manchester so they could continue?<br /><br />If so, I salute his courage, strength and indefatigability!sm753https://www.blogger.com/profile/04474549226665639347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-39186799666704826072009-07-24T17:04:46.061+01:002009-07-24T17:04:46.061+01:00Read the BBC news report of his arrest again;
http...Read the BBC news report of his arrest again;<br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7147481.stmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-70562575363133028212009-07-24T16:41:14.008+01:002009-07-24T16:41:14.008+01:00Mmm... I just deleted a long comment, best to be c...Mmm... I just deleted a long comment, best to be cautious.<br />A printed document would be corroboration would it not ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-15711877486751987082009-07-24T16:20:43.172+01:002009-07-24T16:20:43.172+01:00That would seem to be the strong implication, subr...That would seem to be the strong implication, subrosa. After all, look at the timings as outlined in the indictment. This Beanscene meet allegedly occurred before Fox gave his evidence in court, on the 16th. I can recall no reference to this in the coverage of the defamation action against the News of the World.<br /><br />On the specific charge emanating from this Beanscene encounter, what I was trying to emphasise is that indicting him successfully will rely on more than the word of Colin Fox. What that 'extra', corroborating bit of evidence will be, however, we don't know - all we know is is that the Crown will have to produce something, otherwise the charge will fall and not go the jury.<br /><br />Given the nature of the apparent meeting, quite what this corroborating evidence can be seems a bit murky. That was basically what I was getting at. <br /><br />My apologies for being obscure!Lallands Peat Worrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07238432265194046726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-42253697147023612202009-07-24T15:48:16.541+01:002009-07-24T15:48:16.541+01:00I take it the Crown has evidence which was not pro...I take it the Crown has evidence which was not produced at the NotW trial or has been gathered since. Possibly I'm barking up the wrong tree because I've misunderstood you in some way. Certainly my fault not yours.subrosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00151702590329788260noreply@blogger.com