Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

You're probably right , KJ.
True the behavior isn't acceptable. Just that if none of the participants wanted to press charges against each other this seems like a lot of effort to maybe just end up levying a fine against one or two of them...one already being discharged , it seems.

If a public figure weren't involved I wonder if we'd have even heard about it ?

alfie wrote:You're probably right , KJ.
True the behavior isn't acceptable. Just that if none of the participants wanted to press charges against each other this seems like a lot of effort to maybe just end up levying a fine against one or two of them...one already being discharged , it seems.

If a public figure weren't involved I wonder if we'd have even heard about it ?

Naturally we’re only discussing it here due to Stokes involvement- otherwise its reporting would be local. But a case to be answered nonetheless and, sadly, the sort which crops up with monotonous regularity.

I just can't believe Kai Barry and William O'Connor weren't called to the witness box. The Prosecution has now finished it's case.

Slipstream wrote:I just can't believe Kai Barry and William O'Connor weren't called to the witness box. The Prosecution has now finished it's case.

Exactly what I was thinking, unless the defence/prosecution thinks they might not come over as credible witnesses.

Prosecution finished Wednesday. The defence didn't call them... Very very bizarre, but surely obvious why? As stated, the lads contradict fact in their newspaper article telling, maybe it was deemed that would look bad, or alternatively they change story and the prosecution brandish the article and ask why....either way, don't end well.

Hales neither...strange

I like this by Stokes' lawyer....

@MirrorAsp

Mr Cole again points to Alex Hales. He points to what looks like a kick in the footage and asks the jury to consider whether this could have caused the injury to Mr Hale. He says: "I ask you think about all that footage and think about it clearly."

Some of his lawyers points are clever, some of them seem very desperate. A scattergun presentation clawing at possible doubts to sow ...

If I didn't know the historical rate of failure for these types of crimes, nor the fact well known defendants usually get more leinent treatment, I'd rate stokes as being found guilty based on the arguments and facts as I see it.

But I think it's a non custodial sentence or non guilty verdict coming

Strikes me as a case full of unreliable witnesses and unconvincing lawyers on both sides.

He's probably guilty of the charge but he might get off if the jury think there is some doubt, mainly due to the absence of CCTV and phone video evidence in certain critical places.

Wonder how serious this jury is about thrashing out the finer points or will they all want to get it done and dusted quickly. Might have some with holidays booked?!

Jury was sent out at 10.00
11.25 Court One has re-assembled as the jury have handed the judge a note.
They have asked for copies of uncontested witness statements and medical reports concerning Ryan Ali.

Verdict is not guilty!

I guess jury decided there was not enough evidence for a guilty verdict of affray.

Perhaps the majority didn't think they would have felt threatened if present at the scene.

Either way, Stokes can go back to playing cricket without a criminal record, but hopefully with lessons learnt.

Will he now be available for the third test?

Pending the ECB discipline that now starts work. They didn't progress anything as to not jeopardize his trial.

Great decision for society. Definitely want my kids to watch those videos and learn it's ok to act like that.

sussexpob wrote:Pending the ECB discipline that now starts work. They didn't progress anything as to not jeopardize his trial.

Great decision for society. Definitely want my kids to watch those videos and learn it's ok to act like that.

But he's been found not guilty?

So was OJ Simpson.