Alesha MacPhail case

[19QOS19]

I’m not a phychitrist but I’d assume not. The reason you gave was ‘taxpayers money bla bla.’ Which is wrong.

So I gave two reasons like I said.

[Monkey Tennis]

2 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

16 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Polish your pitchforks for 5 years time.

It's right next to a school as well. I am OUTRAGED.

On that theme, I remember many years ago when it was revealed that some sex offenders were to be moved to Dumfries prison, Border TV tried to stoke outrage in pursuit of a story. 

I live very near the prison, and reporters came to the door asking people what they thought.  They were particularly excited to discover we were soon expecting a baby, as if we'd somehow feel an enhanced version of NIMBY sentiment.  They lost interest when we pointed out that it was a prison and that having undesirables in the neighbourhood was therefore a sort of given.  

The old timer down the street was happier to give them what they wanted though, expressing his concern over the proximity of the school.  He seemed under the impression that there would be a viewing gallery at playtime.

[19QOS19]

Your reason was ‘he can’t be rehabilitated so why waste the money on prison.’ That’s one reason pal. 

Can't be rehabilitated and money. Aye definitely one reason.

On that theme, I remember many years ago when it was revealed that some sex offenders were to be moved to Dumfries prison, Border TV tried to stoke outrage in pursuit of a story. 
I live very near the prison, and reporters came to the door asking people what they thought.  They were particularly excited to discover we were soon expecting a baby, as if we'd somehow feel an enhanced version of NIMBY sentiment.  They lost interest when we pointed out that it was a prison and that having undesirables in the neighbourhood was therefore a sort of given.  
The old timer down the street was happier to give them what they wanted though, expressing his concern over the proximity of the school.  He seemed under the impression that there would be a viewing gallery at playtime.

I know. You do get some people who will genuinely be outraged about that sort of thing. Even if they could see out (I'm sure that wing is at the back) I can't say I would have much of an issue with it tbh.

[dumfriesblue]

i was at laurieknowe primary year 1-7 . lovely school no problem with jessiefield next door . in fact i am now 52  and i can only remember 1 prison escapee  from jessie that was a work release who was found in my parents back garden in alexandra drive .

[19QOS19]

i was at laurieknowe primary year 1-7 . lovely school no problem with jessiefield next door . in fact i am now 52  and i can only remember 1 prison escapee  from jessie that was a work release who was found in my parents back garden in alexandra drive .

Laurieknowe4life bro!

[milton75]

8 hours ago, GordonS said:

Two things not noted in the coverage of this.

Firstly, the jurors have had to see and hear things nobody ever should. I hope they come to terms with it and they are valued for performing an essential and awful public service.

Secondly, the guy's defence QC... Imagine the scene as he's first talking to his client about his version of events;

"Hang on, you want me to say the victim's dad's girlfriend did what now???"

Every defendant must have a representative who will put forward their version of the events, and advocates don't get to pick their clients. It's the only possible way it can work. I'm willing to bet Brian McConnachie QC will have been taking the longest showers of his life every day he finished work. The guy took one for the team.

I just came of a fairly unpleasant case at the High Court. Nothing remotely in this league obviously - it was rape and intimidation and general evilness over 20 odd years. 
I'd only ever done jury duty at the sheriff court before, and I naively did not expect the defense lawyer to be such a monumental c*nt.
I appreciate that they have to do the "job" to the extent of their abilities, but he was at least as creepy as the perpetrator (they were guilty as could be), and tried everything to undermine all opposing evidence.

As we left, after a few weeks of grimness, one of the other jurors mentioned that they'd looked him up. The accused was rich, and his (thankfully unsuccessful) defence council earned around 9 times the salary of the public prosecutor. It was good that the evidence told against the accused, because frankly otherwise the case would have gone down. The defence lawyer ran rings round what the Crown prosecutor could do. It was a mismatched fight, and that is worrying.

[invergowrie arab]

27 minutes ago, milton75 said:

I just came of a fairly unpleasant case at the High Court. Nothing remotely in this league obviously - it was rape and intimidation and general evilness over 20 odd years. 
I'd only ever done jury duty at the sheriff court before, and I naively did not expect the defense lawyer to be such a monumental c*nt.
I appreciate that they have to do the "job" to the extent of their abilities, but he was at least as creepy as the perpetrator (they were guilty as could be), and tried everything to undermine all opposing evidence.

As we left, after a few weeks of grimness, one of the other jurors mentioned that they'd looked him up. The accused was rich, and his (thankfully unsuccessful) defence council earned around 9 times the salary of the public prosecutor. It was good that the evidence told against the accused, because frankly otherwise the case would have gone down. The defence lawyer ran rings round what the Crown prosecutor could do. It was a mismatched fight, and that is worrying.

The person was able to google the salary of what was presumably a private client solicitor and partner in the practice?

Presuming the Campbell's legal team were obtained through legal aid I would be surprised if any of them are clearing 40K a year and certainly wouldn't be earning much for this case.

Not pocket change but not exactly raking it in either.

[supermik]

47 minutes ago, milton75 said:

I just came of a fairly unpleasant case at the High Court. Nothing remotely in this league obviously - it was rape and intimidation and general evilness over 20 odd years. 
I'd only ever done jury duty at the sheriff court before, and I naively did not expect the defense lawyer to be such a monumental c*nt.
I appreciate that they have to do the "job" to the extent of their abilities, but he was at least as creepy as the perpetrator (they were guilty as could be), and tried everything to undermine all opposing evidence.

As we left, after a few weeks of grimness, one of the other jurors mentioned that they'd looked him up. The accused was rich, and his (thankfully unsuccessful) defence council earned around 9 times the salary of the public prosecutor. It was good that the evidence told against the accused, because frankly otherwise the case would have gone down. The defence lawyer ran rings round what the Crown prosecutor could do. It was a mismatched fight, and that is worrying.

When I was on jury service the defence lawyer spent most of the time staring at us all individually, trying to intimidate us. I just kept staring back at him. Mind you, he managed to get the case dismissed before we even got to deliberate so he obviously won.

[MuckleMoo]

I saw tonight on the news that the boy was being treated for depression and ADHD. How very modern! Does society these days not just accept that some people, however young they may be, and just twisted and evil, like they used to? I'm sure Ian Brady was a lovely bloke when he wasn't killing children for example. 
The other thing I am a bit conflicted with is the role of the defence lawyers. Sure, he is being paid handsomely to defend this evil boy, but to try and bring innocent people into the case and highlight their wrong doings, whilst trying to keep their client's anonymity in place, I find totally morally corrupt.

Agree.

As shocking as this case is it will happen again some time, some where. Death penalty? No, it will not stop that minuscule percentage of people (mostly males) committing the most horrific crimes imanagible.

f**k knows what's went through this kids head (I've got a 16 year old boy and yes, he's still a kid) but that dosent excuse the horrific nature of the crime. Christ, the mother of the child looked like a girl as well.

Not sure what I'm trying to say to be honest. Only that child abuse and murder will still occur despite the amount of social workers, police or fecking death penalties you put in place

[The_Kincardine]

10 minutes ago, MuckleMoo said:

f**k knows what's went through this kids head (I've got a 16 year old boy and yes, he's still a kid) but that dosent excuse the horrific nature of the crime. Christ, the mother of the child looked like a girl as well.

Not sure what I'm trying to say to be honest. Only that child abuse and murder will still occur despite the amount of social workers, police or fecking death penalties you put in place

Of course it will, whatever the hang 'em, flog 'em brigade say.

I also have a 16 year old and she is also, as you said, a kid.  Big difference between her and her 20 yo sister.  You'll notice this in 4 years - and it's actually nice to see how they develop in to adulthood.

I think we just do as we do - try and raise well-mannered and respectful weans - and try not to be a paranoiac who thinks there's a rapist/murderer around every corner.  There isn't.

[GordonS]

9 hours ago, Dee Man said:

Surely lawyers know exactly what they're letting themselves in for as soon as they decide to pursue that career and that they're highly likely to be involved in some horrific cases. They're rewarded handsomely for their choice of job which obviously doesn't lessen the impact of the horrors that they're subjected to but to suggest they're some sort of martyrs is pushing it a bit. 

Very, very few QCs will ever be involved in a case anywhere near as disturbing as this, or be required to present such an obviously ridiculous defence. This is like being a polis and having a plane explode over your town - aye, you might know it's the sort of thing that could happen, but it's still incredibly rare and could be seriously tough going.

Advocates do get well paid, but they also work unbelievable hours. I couldn't do it.

9 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Aye, I'd quite happily offer a shite defence for a horrible creep for £500 an hour or whatever they get.

They don't get anything like £500 an hour. When you pay for a flight do you think the money goes to the Captain?

6 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

11 hours ago, GordonS said:

Don't get me wrong, like most people I want to personally remove his frontal lobe with a claw hammer, but emotion like that after extreme and incredibly rare crimes like this makes for very bad law.

I'm not an advocate of the death penalty but in cases like this you wonder what the alternative is. The cretin would have committed this crime even if we had the death penalty so it certainly isn't a deterrent. I don't think death penalty advocates see it as simply a life for a life though. Does anyone believe this man (at 16 he knows right from wrong) can be rehabilitated? I doubt it very much. As I've said elsewhere; you can't change who people are attracted to. If he can't be rehabilitated then he's going be spending his time in a prison paid for by us. Those two reasons alone are why I'm not entirely against it either.

The single biggest problem with having the death penalty is that you will definitely kill innocent people. If we'd had the death penalty in the 70s and 80s we'd have killed a lot of innocent Irish people.

4 hours ago, D.A.F.C said:

My personal opinion is that there's no need to release his or anyone's name to the press unless there's a real need to.
He has been caught and will hopefully never leave prison. The family and probably everyone on that island knows who did it.
By bringing it out in public the family will be reminded of it a few times a year now.
I don't see the reason other than selling papers.

The one strong argument for me is that it was never going to be possible to keep his identity secret. Everyone on Bute knew who it was, and it was always going to be easy to find on social media. Rather than decades of fighting a losing battle, they might as well get it out now. It's not like he's going to be getting released any time soon.

3 hours ago, milton75 said:

I just came of a fairly unpleasant case at the High Court. Nothing remotely in this league obviously - it was rape and intimidation and general evilness over 20 odd years. 
I'd only ever done jury duty at the sheriff court before, and I naively did not expect the defense lawyer to be such a monumental c*nt.
I appreciate that they have to do the "job" to the extent of their abilities, but he was at least as creepy as the perpetrator (they were guilty as could be), and tried everything to undermine all opposing evidence.

As we left, after a few weeks of grimness, one of the other jurors mentioned that they'd looked him up. The accused was rich, and his (thankfully unsuccessful) defence council earned around 9 times the salary of the public prosecutor. It was good that the evidence told against the accused, because frankly otherwise the case would have gone down. The defence lawyer ran rings round what the Crown prosecutor could do. It was a mismatched fight, and that is worrying.

That is literally his job.

If you're talking about the advocate (as it was a High Court trial), he didn't get any say in getting this case. He wasn't chosen by the defendant. Advocates work on a "cab-rank" rule - you get whoever is available next in line.

BTW, your fellow juror committed a criminal offence and their search could have caused a mistrial. If the accused was convicted it would be grounds for appeal. You might want to delete/edit your post and never tell that story again.

[The_Kincardine]

45 minutes ago, GordonS said:

Advocates do get well paid, but they also work unbelievable hours. I couldn't do it.

They don't get anything like £500 an hour. When you pay for a flight do you think the money goes to the Captain?

For a junior barrister (I'm more familiar with terms in England)?  You probably pay more per hour for your mechanic.

£500 per hour for a Queer Customer (I've listened to Rumpole of the Bailey) isn't unusual.

[MeadowArab]

I wonder if he'll be transferred down here at some stage. I'm sure Jessifield has the largest proportion of kiddy fiddlers in the country so they'll be equiped to deal with him.

Jessiefield? Where's that? Genuinely never heard of it

[sparky88]

1 hour ago, MixuFixit said:

 

 

Was just coming on to say the same thing. What an irresponsible arsepiece that juror was.
 

 

Could say that about either that juror or the one who came on to P and B to talk about the case.

[MONKMAN]

8 hours ago, invergowrie arab said:

The person was able to google the salary of what was presumably a private client solicitor and partner in the practice?

Presuming the Campbell's legal team were obtained through legal aid I would be surprised if any of them are clearing 40K a year and certainly wouldn't be earning much for this case.

Not pocket change but not exactly raking it in either.

His defense team was headed by Brian McConnachie QC.   He is consistently ranked in the top legal earners in the country, taking in hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal aid fees each year alone.  

[milton75]

Could say that about either that juror or the one who came on to P and B to talk about the case.

You could, if I had the remotest intention of telling goons like yourself which case it was. As it is, I don't.

Regarding this juror, however, they were an imbecile in many ways. That said, the QC's name is publicly known and while I don't approve of their actions, nor am I very surprised. e.g. I've seen dear old Donald Findlay's approximate salary in passing before. Is the BBC breaking the law by publishing it?

[Monkey Tennis]

3 hours ago, MeadowArab said:

10 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

I wonder if he'll be transferred down here at some stage. I'm sure Jessifield has the largest proportion of kiddy fiddlers in the country so they'll be equiped to deal with him.

Jessiefield? Where's that? Genuinely never heard of it

It's simply the old name for the prison in Dumfries.  

It was a Young Offenders place back in the day, but is now simply HMP Dumfries.  It's very near Palmerston.

[invergowrie arab]

27 minutes ago, MONKMAN said:

His defense team was headed by Brian McConnachie QC.   He is consistently ranked in the top legal earners in the country, taking in hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal aid fees each year alone.  

Of course it was a High Court case. My mistake.

[Hauzen]

2 hours ago, MONKMAN said:

His defense team was headed by Brian McConnachie QC.   He is consistently ranked in the top legal earners in the country, taking in hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal aid fees each year alone.  

Just googled him and his profile on advocates.org.uk lists a Yahoo email address in his contacts. Top lawyer type using a free web-based email, is he Lionel Hutz?

[AyrshireTon]

On 2/22/2019 at 12:42, FuzzyBear said:

Dont really care if they release his name or not but I reckon the sentence will be a lot shorter than some are saying - about 10 years.

The only way he's coming out again is if other prisoners put him in a hospital or a coffin.