General Chat

You are correct Hayley. :-D

Unless of course John is a JP and really meant 'bench'

I think you are correct Hayley :-D

I didnt realise they had jury's in a magistrates court , I thought it was the magistrates that heard the case and decided if the accused is gulity or not gulity but as I am not familair with courts I will stand corrected.

Many thanks, Supercrutch. That was what I could not find when I searched.

Have only once been on a jury. And that was in a magistrate's court. The whole process seems very complicated.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/court/crown-court.htm

The above link may give more of an insight.

John, this person, along side everyone else in this country being charged with an offence, has three options of pled.
Guilty, not guilty, and the rite to silence.

He has obviously excersised his rite to remain silent.

Julia in Derbyshire

Julia A fair trial is what I want. Am sure it is what we all want on here. I have absolutely no idea about all of this at moment, and am watching developments as closely as I can. Deep debate in Carpaninis coffee shop in the Rhondda yesterday about it all and a lot of ill-based speculation.

Nearly waded in with my "you don't know anything about it" but refrained.

Have tried to search on google for why no plea was entered yesterday. Failed, Think I saw "85 days maximum" mentioned and, yes, I feel it must have something to do with selecting a jury. I did genuinely expect that, once the case had been bumped up to County Court, that a plea would be made.

It will be very difficult to select the 'correct' jury for this trial.
Similarly, the venue for the trial 'may' have to be moved, to ensure that this man receives a fair trial, as is his basic human riite. (right).
This is, John, wether you like it or not.

Julia in Derbyshire

Kay Thank you. Selecting a jury before he pleads makes a lot of sense to me. Sometimes people can ask questions on here that they genuinely do not know the answer to. And others know a lot more than us on many topics.

It should not be - wait for a question, make the person feel as uncomfortable as possible in his or her ignorance, all agree he or she is stupid for asking.

For information:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bridger-appears-in-court-as-family-ties-to-april-revealed-8206047.html
"He was remanded in custody and no application for bail was made. The court heard that the prosecution had been given notice of Mr Bridger's "likely defence" which had been taken in interviews.

Some of the witnesses in the case will be as young as seven, the court heard. The judge, Mr Justice Griffith-Williams, said a decision about the location of the future trial would be made after consultation with the victim's family.

The case was adjourned until January 11 while investigations continue. Elwen Evans QC, prosecuting, said forensic and other "extensive investigations" were continuing "apace" and the judge agreed that "matters may develop"."

I think you put yourself centre stage John.

This is about a missing little girl, not you, so let's keep it that way.

Yahoo will surely have the answer John on -due process of the law-
or maybe you could phone a friend?

there maybe elements in this case that are not known to the public,,,,,,,,he wont be required to plead guilty till before a jury.

Until April is found, then I doubt we'll be informed of every move, or who did what and when, just as it should be.

Why am I suddenly centre stage almost every time I ask a simple question.

I do not know the law very well. Why did we not know yesterday how Bridger intends to plead? Bridger must know whether he intends to say he is innocent or guilty on each of the 3 counts.

Is this delay in pleading normal. Surely not an absolutely stupid question

Island Had not seen your response, but somehow I knew what you would say anyway. Not really any answer to my question, just a comment that I should not even ask.

Exactly Sue. Love the way John side stepped my comment.

I agree Kay. Just think how the family must feel - it doesn't matter in the very least how everyone else feels.

Kay and Sue No, don't know law to that degree at all. hence question. It seems to me that Bridger will know whether he is guilty or not.

I expected him to plead "not guilty" on all 3 charges yesterday, but had a sneaking suspicion he may plead guilty on one or more charges.

So we presumably need to wait till after Christmas now to hear anything from the accused. Bit different to WDYTYA last night, when Celia Imrie's 8 x gt grandfather was tried and sentenced to be hung, drawn and quartered for treason within 2 days. And he was totally innocent.

Why 'we' have to wait???

For goodness sake John, this is real life not a flamin' 'who done it' :-|

at this time he is only *assumed gulity* of 2 crimes,,,,,its a jurys job to find him gulity with substantial evidence or beyond reasonable doubt of 1 or all 3 accounts he is being charged with.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

also suprised you dont know *due process of the law* John.!

Probably because his legal team and the investigative officers need to decide which is the best way to go about his trial.

Whether people like it or not the man is entitled to a fair trial - he is still the "alleged" abductor and murderer.