Well That Was A Waste Of Time......

[ToraToraTora]

https://news.sky.com/story/ryan-giggs-trial-jury-discharged-after-failing-to-reach-verdicts-on-assault-and-controlling-behaviour-charges-12685890

[Gromit]

Wait for Mendy verdict. He is going away for a long time.

[New Judge]

Not a waste of time, Tora. He faced a jury trial and juries very often fail to reach a verdict. The alternative would be not to have prosecuted him.

[ToraToraTora]

Yes but presumably they didn't have any convincing evidence.

[Ellipsis]

Convincing enough for some, not for others, it would seem ...

[ladybirder]

7 women, 4 men on the Jury. Hmmm! I wonder if the men voted one way and the women the other.

//However, today, the jury of seven women and four men said they had failed to agree verdicts on any of the charges against Giggs.\\

[FatticusInch]

So what now, a retrial with a different jury?
Or do the CPS go away and re-assess?

[jackthehat]

I did think a conviction was unlikely.
However, I always remember this from his past.
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Giggs+back+with+the+girl+he+beat%3B+IT'S+FATAL+ATTRACTION+SAYS+DAVINIA.-a060660011

[drmorgans]

Hasn't the evidence in court revealed what he is, despite the words of Lord Fergs?

[New Judge]

//Yes but presumably they didn't have any convincing evidence.//

If they didn't have any convincing evidence the CPS would not have prosecuted. They undertake a two-part test. The first part is they "...must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction." Note, not the certainty of a conviction, but a realistic prospect. They can assess evidence as realistic and credible, but they cannot assess how a jury will accept it.

The second part of their test does not concern us here.

[andy-hughes]

I don't think due legal process is ever a waste of time.

[Ellipsis]

> Any retrial will not take place until at least 5 June 2023, the judge said.
> Mr Giggs' head dropped when he heard how long it could take for the case to conclude.

I shouldn't think anybody's very happy about it. We need to do better than this. Perhaps the judge who has also sat through the entire proceedings could provide the verdict in such cases - or perhaps the judge's decision could be added (as three votes?) to the jurors' decisions to see if that produces a clear majority.

[New Judge]

//Perhaps the judge who has also sat through the entire proceedings could provide the verdict in such cases - or perhaps the judge's decision could be added (as three votes?) to the jurors' decisions to see if that produces a clear majority.//

No, no and thrice no. :-)

[Ellipsis]

LOL, thanks, NJ.

[Canary42]

///perhaps the judge's decision could be added (as three votes?) to the jurors'///

So if the jury vote 7-5 for GUILTY the judge can then nullify that by adding his three votes to the NOT GUILTY. I'm with NJ on this one.

Having sat on a jury as Foreman, I know just how hard it can be to get a unanimous verdict.

[Hopkirk]

Does it really matter now? The damage has been done, surely no one would consider employing him now.
He would be better off retiring to some anonymous place and laying low.

[jno]

I don't know, Hopkirk, people still seem to employ Johnny Depp. And perhaps that's right: they've been tried properly and juries weren't convinced by the evidence.

[Ellipsis]

> So if the jury vote 7-5 for GUILTY the judge can then nullify that by adding his three votes to the NOT GUILTY.

No because neither 7 nor 8 is sufficient. But my main point was "We need to do better than this."

[ToraToraTora]

AH: "I don't think due legal process is ever a waste of time. " - well it is when the CPS clearly haven't got the evidence to convince a jury but go ahead anyway. What's that all about? They just hope the jury will think the same as them. The CPS seem to be driven by factors other than adhering to the principle of going ahead when there is a realistic prospect of a conviction.

[ToraToraTora]

Elipsis: " or perhaps the judge's decision could be added (as three votes?) to the jurors' decisions to see if that produces a clear majority. " - that would be like a football referee giving one team a head start. Ridiculous notion.

[ToraToraTora]

Elipsis: "But my main point was "We need to do better than this." " - yes by getting a CPS fit for purpose.