Viewing Thread:
"Barry George"

Apologies if I've splet the name wrong, I've only heard it on the news, so I'll spell it as George should be spelt.

Anywho, I'd just like to say that I'm rather shocked that a jury could find him guilty based upon the evidence supplied. The majority of it was circumstantional evidence! I reckon that whoever had of been on trial for the murder of Jill Dando would have been found guilty!

I'm not saying that Barry George is an innocent man, he may well have committed the crime, but considering that many of the witnesses gave very different discriptions of the man they saw, and a number of them didn't finger Barry in an identity parade?

Considering that OJ got off because he made his hand not fit a glove...mind you, that was America.

Is this justice? What if a celebrity had of been the one on trial here, and the victim had of been someone not famous. Would we have seen the same verdict?

Let's put it like this: Barry George would have killed someone had he not been locked up. Okay, the evidence that he killed Jill was minute and not enough to convict, but this guy was serious danger to society, it's a miracle he's been on the streets this long.

Chances are he did kill her, but the law doesn't work like that, does it. I'm glad he's been locked up, frankly, He was a nutcase who would have ended up killing someone else, if not himself sooner rather than later.

Your Honour wrote:
> The thing is "Beyond reasonable doubt" is SO subjective.
> It can be interpreted in so many different ways depending on your
> point of view.

I dont think it can... not really... I do think it is open to bias and abuse...

but then given the individuality of each case, its hard, if not impossible to state any hard/firm laws that satisfactuarily cover all situations that may occur...

There are many problems with the law as it currently stands, not restricted to, but certainly includeing, the dated structure of the process, which owns limited flexability and snaikl speed of process...

the apparent inability of Judges to make calls based in the current case, preferring to play it safe, and rely of previous presidence...

And the more recent problems with the larger, more public cases being decided by the media, and percieved public opinion (as percieved my the media) and less by the presentation of the case/facts/etc...

However, all things said and done, although I believe the need for major changes of the law system, if not a complete overhaul... I am at the end of the day, just sitting here complaining about it, and taking no action... and therefore own that which I deserve...

The thing is "Beyond reasonable doubt" is SO subjective. It can be interpreted in so many different ways depending on your point of view.

But no more sickening that what happens to so many other people.

When the shoe was on the other foot (or indeed glove on, or not on, the other hand) what happened?

I know that it was America, and their courts aren't exactly the same as ours, but OJ got off when the evidence against him was stronger.

And are they still looking for the killer of Nicole Simpson?

It seems to me that because it was Jill Dando, the jury would have found whoever the Sun put on the stands guilty.

I'm not saying he's innocent, but beyond resonable doubt?

By unstable I meant mentally not all there

But I do hope thay got the right person for the crime because it is sickening what happened to her.

seeya

Exactly.

A jelly is unstable, it wobbles all the time, does that mean that it killed Jill Dando?

I think not.

All i can say is that i wasn't in court and so i don't know every bit of evidence presented by the prosecution and defence.

Woah one minute goatboy. all this extra stuff only came out after he was convicted. It wasnt used as evidence against him . The Jury took five days to review all the evidence and they found him guilty. So then he goes to jail, for life. so the jury took the evidence they had to convict him, they didnt know aboput the attempted rape, or the publicity stunts. they knew about the gun obsession, that was one of the prosecutor's main lines of argument.

The point I am making is that the other things just prove that he was an unstable man, so it makes the verdict seem correct.

seeya

Being odd isn't illegal.
Being obsessed with guns isn't illegal.
When I was a kid, my dad was in a local gun club and Lewis Collins (The Professionals) joined, but was asked to leave because he was too dumb and macho.

So arrest Lewis Collins.

I agree that we dont know the evidence, but from what I have learned from CNN, Reuters, BBC etc, it is 90% circumstantial evidence.

In a criminal case, and especially murder, it has to be the evidence proving "beyond all reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant", whereas civil law requires "the burden of proof be indicative"

I don't believe that the evidence overwhelmingly suggested he did it.
I'm not saying he did, I'm not saying he didnt.

I'm just saying that, based on the evidence presented, I dont think I could have found him guilty.

This case is really a tough one because all the evidence is circumstancial. As far as we are concerned we were not in that court room so we are basing our thoughts on pure hearsay from the media. Her co-worker from That program she did on BBC1 (I cant remember the name of it. I think it was Crime Watch) was interviewed on BBC News 24. He said that he had been in the court every day bar 2 and he said that he thought justice had been carried out. So since we were'nt there we cant be the judge of the case.

But I do think that he did the murder, especially concidering he had tried to rape a woman, and countless times tried to get attention by saying he was different people and he had an obsession with guns but was kicked out of the TA.

All that just leads me to think thta he was a disturbed attention seeker. I mean the pure fact that he doesnt have a partner just seems too odd.

All I do know is when I think of the last few mins of poor Jill Dando's life it makes me feel very very sick and that I'm glad that they have [hopefully] found the person who did it.

Seeya