GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #10

[Moll]

Am I right in thinking the judge can tell the jury after two hours, and if the jurors have not come to a decision, that he will accept a 10-2 verdict? I don't think I dreamt it. However, it does seem quite a short time to discuss such a lot of evidence.

We discussed this on the last thread - two hours is the absolute minimum and it could be days before the judge would accept a majority verdict on a complex case. I'll see if I can find the place.

 

[neteditor]

I am very surprised they are not back already. This worries me. They obviously are not all completely sure he is guilty (or by the same token innocent).

 

[BlueMosaic]

Yes that would be more like it - 95% not cancer. Medical professionals do not like to be negative about diagnosis / prognosis even when the need to be honest in worst case scenarios. This is another example of IS out to gain more sympathy at the time and during the trial. I bet he had HB and his sons waiting on him as much as possible even before the surgery. He seems to enjoy being weak physically and emotionally.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

The 95% sounds like an ISism doesn't it? Doesn't sound like what medics would say. A number of us have commented on how he may have spun out the results for sympathy, even when they were only confirming what was already thought. When I had a non keyhole repair (ie traditional) for a femoral hernia in the 80s I was discharged the next day and had to get on with running a house, two young children and so on. I didn't do anything heavy for a couple of weeks apart from lift a 15 month old child-a bit heavier than a tray.

 

[DollyDiamond]

Oh she is just precious. A diamond !

Awww thank you! She's 11 years old without a tooth in her head and eats me out of house and home! I love her so much, I relate very much to Helen and Boris' relationship. Love never dies and I know theirs lives on. X

 

[jessie]

I am very surprised they are not back already. This worries me. They obviously are not all completely sure he is guilty (or by the same token innocent).

Don't worry. They have got through lunch and need to have some acceptability of consideration after all. :hand:

 

[janeh]

I am very surprised they are not back already. This worries me. They obviously are not all completely sure he is guilty (or by the same token innocent).

IS has made it far more complex either the stories and lies. If some of the jury cannot defferentiate very well, then I suppose this will prolong the decision making. A deliberate intention on IS's part.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Belgarion]

I am very surprised they are not back already. This worries me. They obviously are not all completely sure he is guilty (or by the same token innocent).

Jurors are told there is no pressure of time - and are asked to take as long as they need to consider their verdicts.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/incoming/live-helen-bailey-murder-trial-12633390

 

[neteditor]

Jurors are told there is no pressure of time - and are asked to take as long as they need to consider their verdicts.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/incoming/live-helen-bailey-murder-trial-12633390

My point is if they were as sure as we are, they'd be back within an hour Wishful thinking on my part I suppose.

 

[Tortoise]

Am I right in thinking the judge can tell the jury after two hours, and if the jurors have not come to a decision, that he will accept a 10-2 verdict? I don't think I dreamt it. However, it does seem quite a short time to discuss such a lot of evidence.

I think he'd leave them longer than that, 2 days at least.

 

[janeh]

IS has made it far more complex with the stories and lies. If some of the jury cannot defferentiate very well, then I suppose this will prolong the decision making. A deliberate intention on IS's part.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[neteditor]

I think he'd leave them longer than that, 2 days at least.

He'd ask them long before that if there was any chance of a unanimous verdict. If they say they might still come to one he will let them continue. If they say there's no chance of it, he will allow a majority.

 

[ColourPurple]

Thank you
I thought i was going mad - sure i read it was Amsterdam but then i realised i was getting mixed up with Corrie Mckeagues siblings.

Still, i guess it gives some insight into the finer points of Helens and OS relationship and even OS and IS relationship. 10 days isnt a long time at all and hed be very little support for IS over the other side of the world..

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I don't know how long the Australia trip had been planned but in her evidence didn't Oliver's girlfriend say that he only went to the passport office on April 12th, the day after Helen disappeared.

 

[MissTwiddle]

They're probably still laughing about his piles xx


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[icemaiden65]

Oh she is just precious. A diamond !

Isn't she just the cutest little thing! Love her to pieces, just through a screen! xx

 

[Tortoise]

I am very surprised they are not back already. This worries me. They obviously are not all completely sure he is guilty (or by the same token innocent).

Or they took a lunch break in the jury room, and thought it would look bad if they come back too soon? Like they haven't been diligent enough.

 

[Alyce]

I am very surprised they are not back already. This worries me. They obviously are not all completely sure he is guilty (or by the same token innocent).

I think Judge Bright had something else this afternoon - so perhaps they are waiting for him to finish whatever it is before they call them back in ?

Am trying to find a good reason for the delay

 

[Tortoise]

He'd ask them long before that if there was any chance of a unanimous verdict. If they say they might still come to one he will let them continue. If they say there's no chance of it, he will allow a majority.

I don't think so, we deliberated into the afternoon of the second day and there was no pressure from anyone to find out how we were doing. The clerk isn't in the room with them.

 

[jessie]

I remember Becky Watts' jury returning a verdict much faster than I expected. Never can tell I suppose.

 

[Moll]

The clerk that is with them will report to the judge whether there's any likelihood of a unanimous verdict any time soon. If it appears to be a gridlock the judge can ask them into court to state if they think a verdict can be made and then he may direct a majority verdict if it seems they won't agree unanimously.

I know this question has been well answered already by several people, but having retrieved the bit from Act of 1974 in the last thread I'll post it here in case anyone else is in doubt.

From the Juries Act 1974:
17 Majority verdicts.

(1)​

Subject to subsections (3) and (4) below, the verdict of a jury in proceedings in the Crown Court or the High Court need not be unanimous if—

(a)​

in a case where there are not less than eleven jurors, ten of them agree on the verdict; and

(b)​

in a case where there are ten jurors, nine of them agree on the verdict.

(2)​

Subject to subsection (4) below, the verdict of a jury (that is to say a complete jury of eight) in proceedings in a county court need not be unanimous if seven of them agree on the verdict.

(3)​

The Crown Court shall not accept a verdict of guilty by virtue of subsection (1) above unless the foreman of the jury has stated in open court the number of jurors who respectively agreed to and dissented from the verdict.

(4)​

No court shall accept a verdict by virtue of subsection (1) or (2) above unless it appears to the court that the jury have had such period of time for deliberation as the court thinks reasonable having regard to the nature and complexity of the case; and the Crown Court shall in any event not accept such a verdict unless it appears to the court that the jury have had at least two hours for deliberation.

(5)​

This section is without prejudice to any practice in civil proceedings by which a court may accept a majority verdict with the consent of the parties, or by which the parties may agree to proceed in any case with an incomplete jury.

 

[LozDa]

Dolly-Dog's having a nap while we await the verdict - and I bet she's dreaming of the sausages awaiting her in the fridge when we get justice for Helen and Boris!

Here's a picture of her in a suitably celebratory tutu. I think it would make Helen smile!

Dolly is literally my new favourite thing. Have you seen: https://www.instagram.com/marniethedog/ ?

LOVE LOVE LOVE.