Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="lynx000, post: 3359798, member: 2065"] Lots of carts being put before horses here on the basis of an article in the paper. Unless the journo has seen the CCTV footage (and I don't know if that has occurred or not), the report is in all likelihood based on what they have been told about it. Even if they have seen it, it is only his/her interpretation of what it showed. If it is as clear cut as alleged, I wonder why it has taken this long to get to this stage. My understanding was that his solicitor had the CCTV footage a fair while ago, and the first thing would have been to make a submission to the prosecution to have the charges dropped. So, I would wait and just let it play out. [USER=8833]@tommy[/USER] there may be many reasons why someone is held on remand. The seriousness of the charge is usually first and foremost (not saying that applies to Milford). The more serious the charge the greater likelihood of the person charged absconding (or so the logic goes). Another factor might be a poor history of compliance with bail, a concern about the person tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses, or a lengthy criminal history. One or a combination of them will usually land you in a situation where bail is refused at magistrates' court level and you are then required to make an application for bail to the Supreme Court. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)