[Candy Annie Cane]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

I think my point has been made

I don't think it has.

You know as well as I do, trials like this means the jury believe either the prosecution or defense lawyers when its one word against another (particularly joint defendants who have been able to get their heads together and stories straight).... at the end of the day it came down to whose legal team was better. As professional, well paid rugby players who can probably afford the best against a girl who probably couldn't afford anywhere close to the fees these "men" paid.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

I don't think it has.

You know as well as I do, trials like this means the jury believe either the prosecution or defense lawyers when its one word against another (particularly joint defendants who have been able to get their heads together and stories straight).... at the end of the day it came down to whose legal team was better. As professional, well paid rugby players who can probably afford the best against a girl who probably couldn't afford anywhere close to the fees these "men" paid.

OJ Simpson was definitely innocent too!