welbeck
there have been several comments which assume, ie pre-judge, the outcome of the trial.
they assume or assert that the defendant is guilty.
i do not understand the comment about tv personality.
the defendant is not such.
there are v strict guidelines for news outlets in
their reporting of criminal cases.
they can only report the facts of the case, without comment.
this forum is equivalent to published material for the purposes of the contempt of court act 1981.
the strict liability rule applies.
i do not want to copy or quote the comments on here which offend, so as not to repeat the contempt.
i do not understand the comment about tv personality.
the defendant is not such.
PS is the brother of the defendant. There have been comments about what he may or may not have done or said, or how he's interacted with the defendant. Thus his involvement in the case.
This is entirely separate from the fact that PS appears on a televised show, and for reasons unconnected with the case against his brother he is either liked or disliked because of his 'performance' on that show. Such comments are therefore not prejudicial to the case - because they don't relate to it, but to the way he handles the show itself.
