I know Kelly is a specialist defence QC but there’s nothing about rape trials in that pen pic. I imagine the courtroom craft needed in a financial fraud trial, which he appears to specialise in according to his pen pic, is quite different to that required in a rape trial. To be fair, having done a bit more digging, he has experience in other sorts of criminal cases besides financial fraud. But I still don’t see any rape cases advertised on his record, open to correction on that of course.
I mentioned the Tyson case last week. Vincent J. Fuller, Tyson’s lead lawyer, was appointed by Tyson’s manager Don King because he had got him off in a tax evasion case. But he wasn’t experienced in rape trials and is generally thought to have done a pretty poor job.
Toby Hedworth appears to be a vastly experienced and versatile QC, with huge expertise in all sorts of different cases, both prosecuting and defending.
Yeah it was a good point. Frozen to me wouldn’t imply frozen in the literal sense though… I would have thought of it in terms of submission, compliance, mind shutting off, unable to resist.
Or maybe she was frozen initially with shock/fear when she says Jackson pushed her on the bed and then she complied, not consented but just went with it.
Kelly is speaking very literally as if the girl was rigid for an hour but I wouldn’t interpret it that way… that being said, many people would and find it difficult to relate to unless they’ve been in a similar situation. It was certainly a vaild point for defence.
Yes, I don’t know anymore about him. I’d imagine making funny quips works in softening high end fraud cases. I can’t see how his tactics will enamour a normal run of the mill jury
I was wondering about this point myself earlier. Does a quip, pun, one liner, rhyme work? I guess it depends on the jury*. If the glove don’t fit you must acquit.
That sort of courtroom manner can matter a great deal too. And how do I know that? Because I’m a member of the public, like the jury. Normal people pick up on the manner of others and form opinions of them and what they are talking about. Now, yeah, we know the case is to be tried on the evidence and the evidence alone, but this sort of stuff could make a difference in a case which is touch and go, as this one almost certainly is.
That’s separate to the defence’s decision that the defendants should take to the stand, a decision which is looking, well, extremely questionable at best.
An awful lot of talk about male privilege these days. You don’t hear much about female privilege, they must all be doing the dishes, darning the socks and scrubbing the scullery floors.
