Quote:
Originally Posted by driveway
However, the testimony of the victims was then sealed. The defence was not allowed access to it. The accused were then asked, under oath, to respond to the accusations, without being allowed to know the specifics of what they were accused of.
|
Is this true? This immediately invalidates anything resembling a fair trial and is utterly unacceptable. Any verdict that stands under these circumstances is a sham. No one can defend themselves under these circumstances.
To be clear, I don't care if there is video of him doing it, I don't care if there are forty eye-witnesses, you
cannot have a trial where the defendant is unable to specifically respond to the facts as presented by the prosecution. They might as well have skipped the whole court process.