. Feb. 2010. – 16:25:07
There are many reasons put forward why Peter Blake at his fourth history making trial by a judge without jury was allowed to leave the court and subsequently abscond. The background is that three previous attempts to try this man failed owing to a suspicion of jury tampering. This current trial where verdict as well as sentence will be that of the single judge will continue without him. It is argued that since he had not failed any previous court hearings remand on bail for this trial was not inappropriate. His bail was not surprise surprise unconditional. Apparently somebody had put up £250K surety and at 2.15pm Feb. 17th there was an indication that a large part of that surety was to be withdrawn the result of which would have been a remand in custody for the duration of the trial unless a substitute were found. He was allowed to speak to his lawyers. There is nothing known about why he was not escorted by officers for that promenade. It was not contrary to his bail conditions. The man was considered so dangerous to three juries that his trial made history. It`s made history again for a totally absurd waywardness on somebody`s part.
No comments:
Post a Comment