Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Re the call for a retrial for Ghislaine Maxwell

90 replies

FluffyBooBoo · 06/01/2022 08:56

Apparently the defence are calling for a retrial because one of the jurors was a victim of child sex abuse - they had to answer questions, one of which was (I am paraphrasing) 'have you, your family or friends experienced sexual abuse, sexual harassment or sexual assault'

AIBU to think that there are very few women out there that haven't experienced some form of sexual harassment, and the chances of anyone (male or female) not knowing someone affected by one of these things is highly unlikely? And that the people on the jury therefore are likely to be men that don't talk about these things? Not convinced that's ideal tbh.

OP posts:
DerAlteMann · 06/01/2022 18:20

It was obvious from day one that a Guilty verdict would produce an appeal or a demand for a re-trial. This isn't over by a long way.

Blossomtoes · 06/01/2022 18:32

@DerAlteMann

It was obvious from day one that a Guilty verdict would produce an appeal or a demand for a re-trial. This isn't over by a long way.
It is if a mistrial is declared and her defence successfully makes a claim that a fair trial is now impossible.
daretodenim · 07/01/2022 00:33

@BlwyddynNewydd2022

Call me a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist, but how timely that a person has spoken out knowing it could cause a re-trial. Wonder if any money's post trial has crossed hands ....
My thoughts exactly.

There's a Netflix documentary about two Miami drugs kingpins. They managed to tamper with the jury quite successfully. For the right amount if money, some people are willing to perjure themselves. The one in the documentary was only found out because police noticed he was spending a lot of money suddenly. He was a security guard, so shouldn't have had much.

daretodenim · 07/01/2022 00:35

How could they possibly do a retrial? Who hasn't heard of this case now and didn't hear the verdict! How would they find the jury?

HeddaGarbled · 07/01/2022 00:52

How would they find the jury

Public audition, which is pretty much what they do anyway. Perhaps the audience could vote a juror off every week.

Motherdare · 07/01/2022 21:15

Those who think it’s a conspiracy… wouldn’t it have been easier to get the bent juror to persuade the rest of them to find her not-guilty? This seems a long-winded way of doing it.

Cosmos123 · 07/01/2022 21:22

It will be a retrial.

Also likely to appeal against the fact she didn't get to call her 35 witnesses to the stand.

Cosmos123 · 07/01/2022 21:23

I believe she will still be found guilty.

Traumatic for victims though.

JanuaryBluehoo · 07/01/2022 21:43

It would be an insult for the victims to do a re trial.

This isn't like finding out someone is a kkk member or something.
Why is it something that needs disclosure it's deeply personal?

Blossomtoes · 07/01/2022 23:03

Why is it something that needs disclosure it's deeply personal?

Because it makes it almost impossible to be objective.

melj1213 · 08/01/2022 10:36

@JanuaryBluehoo

It would be an insult for the victims to do a re trial.

This isn't like finding out someone is a kkk member or something.
Why is it something that needs disclosure it's deeply personal?

It would also be an insult to the justice system not to have a retrial.

The entire justice system is set up on the premise that everyone - regardless of the crime - deserves the right to a fair and just trial. That means not having people on a jury who have a bias that means they cannot impartially judge the accused on the evidence alone.

It needs disclosure so that the defence and the prosecution can ask the juror more questions to ensure the accused gets a fair trial. Just answering "yes" to being the victim of sexual abuse or rape does not mean that you would be automatically removed from the jury pool, but it would mean you were flagged for extra questioning to ensure that your personal experience would not impact you to the point that you could not make an impartial decision based on the facts of the case alone. If you could assure the prosecution and defence that you may have been raped in the past but would not use that experience to make a judgement, or use that information to influence any of the other jurors decisions, then you would be allowed on the jury.

In this case, the juror didn't make the defence and prosecution aware of their history but then went on to use it in the jury room to influence the other jurors decision - this means that the judgement may not have been made on just the facts and evidence of the case, and therefore was not a fair trial.

sweetbellyhigh · 22/01/2022 09:27

@melj1213

It really isn't. That's what the words say but look at the reality. The justice system is set up to protect the privileged and endorse systemic abuse of the vulnerable. Words don't change that.

Viviennemary · 22/01/2022 09:45

If the other girls recruited why are they not being prosecuted.

Motherdare · 02/04/2022 00:46

No retrial. Conviction stands.

GrimDamnFanjo · 02/04/2022 12:54

Is it correct that she won't learn her sentence till June?

New posts on this thread. Refresh page