I'm hoping that the judge is thinking it'll be worth proscuting in order to highlight the issue so the supermarkets/whoever decide to do something good about the wastage.
Donno if thats wishful thinking
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:11, 1 reply, 11 years ago)

Judges don't prosecute. The CPS prosecute on behalf of the state, the judges oversee the trial and ensure it is conducted properly
and, if necessary, instruct the jury.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:13, Reply)

Yah', but still, I hoping that's why the proscuters are proscuting tho'

( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:15, Reply)

Yeah - how does that work - the judge instructing the jury? Can't the judge instruct the jury to find someone guilty/not guilty as well?
Doesn't that sort of defeat the purpose?
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:19, Reply)

Yes
Sort of.
( Peej, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:22, Reply)

And in the case of Louise "Shake 'n' Smac" Woodward the judge disagreed with the Jury's guilty of Murder verdict
and changed it to manslaughter.
( Peej, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:23, Reply)

See - that's what I mean.
I thought it was up to the jury.

I did jury service once - it was ace. At one point, one of the defendants tried to prove that it wasn't him that could have been swinging the bat, because he had a bad arm, on which the muscles had wasted. He claimed he couldn't even pick up light things, like, say, the microphone in front of him, which he demonstrated by lifting it up.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:27, Reply)

I think it's only fair that the Eappen family should be given the opportunity to give her recently born child a bit of a roughing up, to see how she likes it.

( tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:27, Reply)

He changed the level of the charge
rather than the verdict though, he wouldn't be able to say the jury finds you guilty but you have nice tits so I am saying not guilty.
(Bonzodog29 is an unemployed sponge of the worst kind, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:29, Reply)

and it was changed on appeal (wasnt it?)

(Bonzodog29 is an unemployed sponge of the worst kind, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:30, Reply)

Not really, 10 days after the murder verdict he reduced the conviction. It didn't really go through a proper appeals process
If she had been a black American she would still be inside.
( Peej, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:38, Reply)

ah fair enough
I thought there were a few odd things with the case though, didn't her defence lawyers refuse to have manslaughter as an option, saying it was murder or nothing, due to them being paid for by her agency. Which would mean the agency would be liable if a manslaughter verdict was given.

Only vaguely remembered and possibly hearsay
(Bonzodog29 is an unemployed sponge of the worst kind, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:49, Reply)

But that would be awesome.

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:31, Reply)

I don't think her tits were much to write home about.
Foxy Knoxy on the other hand...
( tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:32, Reply)

Well it worked for her

(Bonzodog29 is an unemployed sponge of the worst kind, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:34, Reply)

In many ways I find the risk that Knoxy might murder me after sexing me even more of a turn on

( tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:36, Reply)

Darn tooting

(Bonzodog29 is an unemployed sponge of the worst kind, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:52, Reply)

he can direct them on how to find things
ie, what words mean in a legal context. which is the basis for many criminal appeals.

I am torn about this one. from a human and a moral perspective, if people are hungry and there is food being wasted, it's sickening. but from a social and legal framework perspective, they have still stolen it. and where do you draw the line about that?
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:27, Reply)

IE - is it acceptable to steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving family.
Answer: SOCIETY IS TO BLAME!

Conclusion: Hitler.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:29, Reply)

what they should have done was to write publicly to Iceland seeking permission
that would have put the directors in a nice difficult position.

of course, terribly inconvenient if they'd starved in the meantime.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:33, Reply)

Indeed - taking out a public letter in a decent newspaper must be at least thousands if not tens of thousands of pounds.
They could spend the money on food, instead.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:34, Reply)

Not really
They would have said no and spouted some legal bollocks to get themselves off the hook.
( Peej, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:40, Reply)

i think directors of a big public company would be very wary
and would have spent a fortune on PR and blah blah
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 29 Jan 2014, 10:48, Reply)