Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
Co-accussed, murder trial appeal.....
2 Answers
Hiya, i was wondering if anyone out there would be able to help...
A friend of a friend - P was found guilty of murder.... as was his co-accussed - S. they where both given life sentences with a minimum term of 20 years!
If P wanted to appeal against the conviction( he blamed S, S balmed P), would S automatically get an appeal? or if they agree to a re-trial for P would S be also re-trialed or could they just be used as a witness! as far as i am aware S has no plans to re-trial although S has written to P appologising for the way it has turned out, could that letter be used in a court?
any answers would be appreciated. P is waiting for his solicitors to visit him to begin the appeal but in the mean time any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in Advance
A friend of a friend - P was found guilty of murder.... as was his co-accussed - S. they where both given life sentences with a minimum term of 20 years!
If P wanted to appeal against the conviction( he blamed S, S balmed P), would S automatically get an appeal? or if they agree to a re-trial for P would S be also re-trialed or could they just be used as a witness! as far as i am aware S has no plans to re-trial although S has written to P appologising for the way it has turned out, could that letter be used in a court?
any answers would be appreciated. P is waiting for his solicitors to visit him to begin the appeal but in the mean time any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in Advance
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by blondie123. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.This called a cut throat defence and from a prosecution point of view its great - each blames the other and they both end up getting convicted. P can appeal and can introduce the letter from S but it wont get him very far.
Judges are not daft (despite trying their best to give that impression sometimes) and will see what P (and S) are up to. If you call S as a witness who now says he did it why did he lie at the trial. The simple fact you cannot believe either of them in the circumstances. To get a 20 year term it must have been pretty nasty
Judges are not daft (despite trying their best to give that impression sometimes) and will see what P (and S) are up to. If you call S as a witness who now says he did it why did he lie at the trial. The simple fact you cannot believe either of them in the circumstances. To get a 20 year term it must have been pretty nasty
There is other evidence that has come to light too! S claimed in the trial that he was scared of P and was bullied into lying for him etc..... surely someone if S was so scared of P he wouldnt have written to him apologising and if S was telling the truth P has just got them 20 years in jail for 'nothing' he wouldnt want to contact them at all, let alone apologise to them.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.