Quote: Briosaid @ 15th August 2018, 7:04 PM
Because they were bribed? It's interesting that the defence didn't call them to give evidence. Men and cricket! Says it all.
Actually, it isn't at all interesting that the defence didn't call them to give evidence. Their testimony would have been worthless to the defence.
As I said in an earlier post, Stokes wasn't charged with assaulting anybody or with injuring anybody. If he had been so charged, he would have been convicted in the twinkling of an eye, based on the overwhelming evidence that, for at least part of the time, he was the aggressor in the conflict.
The prosecution services decided to charge him only with the very serious charge of affray and to ignore lesser charges of assault occasioning bodily harm which would have resulted in surefire convictions. Indeed, it seems that the prosecution realised their mistake shortly before the start of the trial when they tried to introduce the lesser charges in addition to the existing affray charge. The judge, however, was having none of it. He said the defence had spent a great deal of time working on the affray charge and it was not fair that the defence be ambushed with additional charges on the first day of the trial.
The question for the jury was therefore not "Did Stokes attack and injure anybody?"
The question was "Was his conduct sufficiently violent (either physically or verbally) that a reasonably strong and confident person standing or passing nearby might have feared for his/her safety?"
The jury was not convinced that such was the case. They must've taken the view that a passerby would probably have realised that the men fighting had some sort of quarrel with each other and were not simply looking for a fight with just anybody they could lay their hands on.
In terms of justice, he committed a crime and got away with it - simply because the prosecution didn't charge him with the crime he committed.
In terms of the law, the prosecution failed to prove the one charge they brought against him and he was, accordingly, acquitted.