Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Ben Stokes charged with affray
- Thread starter Titanic
- Start date
That was interesting. But why didn't the Stokes defence team call them as witnesses?
GT49er
Well-known member
In that case they would be guilty of Affray; they were found not guilty.
I think if Stokes has any sense he will keep his head down, take a long look at himself, and decide what sort of person he wants to be. Irrespective of the verdict he doesn’t come out of this looking good, and he has a history of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
If Stokes is indeed the "hero" and saved the two gay guys from a bashing, then you can understand the jury siding with his account and finding him not guilty.
But how that also absolves the other two defendants involved in the affray, I have no idea. Well, I think I do. It all comes back to the "were you there, would you have felt personally in danger", and if the honest answer to that is "no" then thats how they ALL got off, including the two nasty pieces of work, one of them with a bottle.
Its an unsatisfactory outcome. Stokes has been fortunate IMO, the other two even MORE fortunate. Its the correct decision within the law, but only because of that caveat that is always inserted in an affray charge. Perhaps the CPS should have had more on the chargesheet than simply 'affray'.
But how that also absolves the other two defendants involved in the affray, I have no idea. Well, I think I do. It all comes back to the "were you there, would you have felt personally in danger", and if the honest answer to that is "no" then thats how they ALL got off, including the two nasty pieces of work, one of them with a bottle.
Its an unsatisfactory outcome. Stokes has been fortunate IMO, the other two even MORE fortunate. Its the correct decision within the law, but only because of that caveat that is always inserted in an affray charge. Perhaps the CPS should have had more on the chargesheet than simply 'affray'.
Post 465 seems to give answers.
GT49er
Well-known member
Which basically brings the whole law/offence of affray into disrepute as it is absolutely worthless. According to the rules on affray as applied in this case, it is alright to beat someone senseless, as long as no bystanders are alarmed that it might be their turn next. Obviously, CPS made a wrong decision in using it at all; chronically inept, IMHO.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
BensGrandad
New member
Does afray carry a bigger sentence than say ABH which may explain why the CPS went for that rather than a lesser charge with more chance of a guilty verdict. I noticed in the shop this morning the headline on The Sun not surprisingly mocking the verdict.
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
I don't know.Perhaps they considered the video evidence supplied by the Sun was more than sufficient to show it was a poor prosecution.
Perhaps that explains the Sun's headline today?
Tribunal Alta
New member
Have you served on a jury? What was it like?
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
BensGrandad
New member
That is surprising as to why they chose to use that charge when I would have thought that ABH would have been easier to prove. Then what do we know?
Showing that we should listen to experts and not Barrack Room lawyers.
Yes, in 2016 at Hove. I got lucky and served as a juror in two, week long trials - one an alleged sexual assault and the other alleged GBH by two young men in a Sussex town. By an incredible bit of luck, 11 of us served together on both juries (out of a jury room of 40 odd candidates each time).
I had thought that it would be hard to stay awake, but it wasn’t like that at all.
Really enjoyed the experience. About 9 of us were very vocal in the deliberating room. Carefully going through our notes taken in court, really interesting directions on law by the judge including recent changes on sexual assault definitions, our instincts where a witness for the sex assault victim thought he could hoodwink the court with exaggerating, timelines, etc.
The human interactions within the jury were fascinating. Being cosmopolitan Sussex we had all types. Two blokes from Saltdean and Worthing kind of took control on organising, focus, votes, but without trying to unduly influence ditherers.
I’d do it again.
A measly £30 per day allowance I recall, no matter your level of lost income.
The Large One
Who's Next?
Worth a read, and some questions posed on here answered...
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/16/the-ben-stokes-trial-what-went-wrong/
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/16/the-ben-stokes-trial-what-went-wrong/
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
All-rounder Stokes, who in August was cleared of affray, has been fined a total of £30,000 and batsman Hales £17,500, £10,000 of which is suspended for 12 months from now.
Hales did not face criminal charges.
Their case was ruled on by the Cricket Disciplinary Commission, which is independent from the ECB.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/46486977
Hales did not face criminal charges.
Their case was ruled on by the Cricket Disciplinary Commission, which is independent from the ECB.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/46486977
dejavuatbtn
Well-known member
I would have been surprised is they gave them further bans after all the cricket they were suspended from.