Jump to content

N Srinivasan will contest for BCCI's President post this year too


velu

Recommended Posts

Posted
Er wrong. You don't need video evidence' date= as otherwise no one would be convicted of anything from murder to rape!!! You can have evidence like witnesses etc and much much more. Not saying there is such evidence here, just pointing out the law does not work based on evidence purely from a video or phone!!
but this is not murder or rape. This is match fixing and insider information. Much more stringent requirements. A murder for example you can have forensic evidence (like the weapon used etc) ditto rape. So you dont need evidence of a phone or video.
Posted
but this is not murder or rape. This is match fixing and insider information. Much more stringent requirements. A murder for example you can have forensic evidence (like the weapon used etc) ditto rape. So you dont need evidence of a phone or video.
More stringent requirements for match fixing and insider information? Please provide law which states that please? Whats this obsession with phone or video as only way of prosecuting for match fixing. Its for jury and judge to decide based on evidence presented to them. The evidence can be in may forms and if it convinces jury then...
Posted
More stringent requirements for match fixing and insider information? Please provide law which states that please? Whats this obsession with phone or video as only way of prosecuting for match fixing. Its for jury and judge to decide based on evidence presented to them. The evidence can be in may forms and if it convinces jury then...
Well you just had an incident whereby Anderson could not be punished caused the evidence was heavily biased. That in itself should tell you that witnesses alone cannot be used to convict people of match fixing.
Posted
Well you just had an incident whereby Anderson could not be punished caused the evidence was heavily biased. That in itself should tell you that witnesses alone cannot be used to convict people of match fixing.
Er wrong! it depends on number of witnesses and the quality of the witnesses, plus of course other evidence. Its for jury/judge to decide on evidence. Not you:--D
Posted
Well you just had an incident whereby Anderson could not be punished caused the evidence was heavily biased. That in itself should tell you that witnesses alone cannot be used to convict people of match fixing.
Now you are saying assaults cant be convicted without video evidence!! :giggle:
Posted
Now you are saying assaults cant be convicted without video evidence!! :giggle:
umm assaults can be convicted without video evidence, again for the last time I will spell this out for you. There is forensic evidence in an assault. When you for eg make somebody bleed there is a good chance your fingerprints will appear on the victim or the weapon used. Ditto rape. There is a semen sample. What is hard to understand in that?
Posted
Er wrong! it depends on number of witnesses and the quality of the witnesses' date=' [b']plus of course other evidence. Its for jury/judge to decide on evidence. Not you:--D
and the other evidence is the key. I am not deciding anything. Never said i did.
Posted
umm assaults can be convicted without video evidence, again for the last time I will spell this out for you. There is forensic evidence in an assault. When you for eg make somebody bleed there is a good chance your fingerprints will appear on the victim or the weapon used. Ditto rape. There is a semen sample. What is hard to understand in that?
You can convict without forensic evidence. Frankly you are talking legal nonsense! If 10 people witness an assault and all identify the guy, he is going to be convicted without your precious video or forensic evidence. In summary you are talking nonsense:--D
Posted
Er wrong! it depends on number of witnesses and the quality of the witnesses' date=' plus of course other evidence. Its for jury/judge to decide on evidence. Not you:--D[/quote'] Quality of witness like KT's posts :giggle:
Posted
You can convict without forensic evidence. Frankly you are talking legal nonsense! If 10 people witness an assault and all identify the guy' date= he is going to be convicted without your precious video or forensic evidence. In summary you are talking nonsense:--D
They will form part of the prosecution evidence. Thats also assuming that those 10 people dont know the victim or the aggressor in a personal capacity. Secondly in this case most of the bookies who claim anybody was involved have potentially given their statements in duress. I never said its impossible to convict people based on eye witnesses. But clearly those witnesses need to have no bias. As was evident in the anderson case.
Posted
As i said before, the indian media got carried away. So some bookie said MSD was involved after he got a beating from the police. Nobody is going to convict on that You look at the Asif and Aamir convictions, they had video evidence. So unless MSD or any csk or other players are caught on camera or on the phone i doubt anybody can be proven to be guilty even by the BCCI You need hard evidence. Not saying MSD is cleaner than clean but you can do jack based on a persons word.
Actually DDDD got carried away lol
Posted
They will form part of the prosecution evidence. Thats also assuming that those 10 people dont know the victim or the aggressor in a personal capacity. Secondly in this case most of the bookies who claim anybody was involved have potentially given their statements in duress. I never said its impossible to convict people based on eye witnesses. But clearly those witnesses need to have no bias. As was evident in the anderson case.
Criminal Investigation and alibi in a court of law is totally different league then all these sports investigation and bodies. Hence people like Cook or Bell or most of cricketers in general will give different answer to same question depending upon if CPS is asking the question or some Big fat ICC committee is asking the question.
Posted
Er wrong. You don't need video evidence, as otherwise no one would be convicted of anything from murder to rape!!! You can have evidence like witnesses etc and much much more. Not saying there is such evidence here, just pointing out the law does not work based on evidence purely from a video or phone!! A persons word as you put it is actually what is called evidence and a witness. Get enough of these so called persons words all saying same thing then...
Nice equating the situation to murder and rape. Well done.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...