Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor 57
You said it all, except he hasn't been charged and faced a criminal court.
He lost a defamation case, full stop
I dunno how many times I have to say this. The judges opinion in that CIVIL case means **** all in reality, it is just his opinion, full stop
|
You totally miss the factual evidence of witnesses, who after rigorous cross examination, were accepted in preference to BRS.
Now you can say the Federal Court Judge got his judgment wrong, accepting the Australian Special Forces soldiers and Afgans evidence over that of BRS.
But the evidence given at trial, in chief, cross examination and re-examination, stands, recorded, and transcribed onto transcripts.
Do you not understand the huge relevance of this evidence, when it comes to prosecutors considering whether the evidence adduced at the civil trial supports the prosecution of a criminal trial?
And you conflate the rules of evidence and admissibility of evidence with burdens of proof.