HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 май 2024
- Criminal Defence Lawyers Joseph Neuberger, Michael Bury, and RUclips personality, legal researcher and host of the UnTrue Crime podcast Diana Davison, sit down and discuss the aftermath of their trials and the emerging and alarming changes to our legal system. A behind the scenes inside look into real courtroom drama.
Website: www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com
Sign up to our email list - eepurl.com/hw3g99
Social Media Links
Twitter: / notonrecord
Instagram: / notonrecordpodcast
TikTok: / notonrecordpodcast
Facebook: / notonrecord
Telegram: t.me/NotOnRecord
Minds: www.minds.com/notonrecord
Audio Platforms
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX...
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
SoundCloud: / notonrecord
Stitcher: www.stitcher.com/podcast/notonrecord
Google Play: podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
Video Platforms
Bitchute: www.bitchute.com/channel/NoUC...
Rumble: rumble.com/c/c-842207
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger & Partners LLP www.nrlawyers.com.
Produced by Benjamin Dichter & Max Silverberg
#weinstein #law #lawyers
Your firm is the best! Another great legal analysis!
I loved listening to this and learned a lot. It also changed how I felt and viewed this case and others. Thank you! I'm from Midwest USA.
Great episode tonight!
"I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on TV."
And the show isn't even accurate in many cases. For instance, "Our Special Love" is described as "a porn website ... based on a real life organization, Newgon," yet bears no resemblance to Newgon, which doesn't even allow porn on its platform and is strictly an advocacy group.
Joseph is right about the problems in the American criminal justice system. The percentage of cases which are disposed of with no trial is shockingly high. Prosecutors dangle draconian sentences over a defendant’s head and offer them a plea deal in the majority of cases.
But Canada has developed some real problems specific to SA prosecutions. It would seem that under Trudeau part deux, it would seem there is a quest afoot to turn SA into a reverse onus crime in which guilt is assumed and innocence must be proven.
25:43 Supporting evidence. No conviction should be possible based solely on testimony from a single eye witness.
Cases are prosecuted in advance in media in Canada too, not just in the USA. That's why, for example, so many media consumers were FURIOUS that Jian Ghomeshi was acquitted.
Also, the comment, "they're not survivors, they're victims" (20:05) is confusing.
Thanks for another important episode.
The fall out was after the verdict and then the Prime Minister's insane response
Myriad media features made the case against Jian long before trial (credit to Diana for criticism of his trial by media) - eg. The Unmaking of Jian Ghomeshi - the Fifth Estate: m.ruclips.net/video/aV2wzubgh1M/видео.html&pp=ygUdVGhlIHVubWFraW5nIG9mIGppYW4gZ2hvbWVzaGk%3D
lol you got your wish a false accuser is being sued, Emma Gabbey is being sued by 4 other people in addition to the Tates. It turns out she did the same crap to other men. So that should be something to keep track of. The other girls going after Tate dropped their cases
You're not supposed to get re-tried in Canada either. It's in our Charter which says to the effect once "all" avenues have been tried you can't re-try someone. That of course is contrary to the point of the clause in the first place! Why have the clause if you can try ppl over and over?
When did this trend of submitting "similar acts" start? I must be behind the times on this issue, b/c I always understood you can't bring up other (alleged) crimes as prejudicing the court! They know it's wrong otherwise they'd allow the same against the accuser! Once again tilting the playing field!
Different rules of justice when a Femunist mob is after you!
It is law in Canada for decades but it has been tightly applied in Canada. The US has been same for a long time BUT applied in not a very strict rigorous manner.
Can anybody say what evidence was provided in the California case against Weinstein?
Well, in that case, Weinstein was on trial for 4 different allegations(originally 5, but the 5th accuser was unable to testify so the prosecutors dropped her charges during the trial), and the prosecutors put on 4 prior bad acts accusers. Weinstein was only convicted of raping Jane Doe 1. He was acquitted on the charges regarding Jane Doe 3, and the jury deadlocked on the charges involving Jane Doe 2(10-2 in favor of Guilty) and Jane Doe 4(8-4 in favor of Guilty). The deadlocked charges were dropped after the trial.
Now, legal experts think the California conviction is less likely to be overturned because California law explicitly allows prior bad acts witnesses, but there is also another issue Weinstein's lawyers have brought up: The issue of the judge in the trial refusing to allow the jury to see text messages that they claim exonerate Weinstein of the crime he was convicted of.
Now, Weinstein claimed he had never even met Jane Doe 1, and Weinstein's lawyers claim the text messages show she was with another man on the night in question and not with Weinstein. In fact, 3 jurors from the trial have come forward and said they wouldn't have convicted Weinstein had they seen the text messages.
Now, I haven't seen these text messages, so I have no idea if Weinstein's lawyers are full of it or if they're telling the truth, but if they're telling the truth, I could see Weinstein getting his California conviction overturned just on that alone.
Sources: variety.com/2023/film/news/harvey-weinstein-appeal-rape-conviction-1235533035/
timesofsandiego.com/crime/2023/10/12/harvey-weinstein-jane-doe-get-split-decision-from-judge-in-lawsuit/
@@cinemafan97. Thank you so much
for your detailed reply!
@@tracymarrow7841 you're welcome.
Miley or Cyrus? Hahaha.
A very important point, but Diana's mockery of the complainant felt rather distasteful.