Xie murder trial delayed
Lian Bin "Robert" Xie's three-month trial was due to start on September 9, but Justice Megan Latham vacated the date in court on Monday.
The NSW Supreme Court heard the Crown and defence came to an agreement that the original trial date should be set aside.
Justice Latham set a tentative new date of March 17, and there will be more pre-trial hearings before then.
The 49-year-old is charged with murdering his brother-in-law, Min "Norman" Lin, 45, Mr Lin's wife, Yun Li "Lily" Lin, 43, her sister, Yun Bin "Irene" Yin, 39, and two boys, aged nine and 12, who cannot be named for legal reasons.
Their bodies were found in a North Epping house, in Sydney's northwest, on July 18, 2009.
(Sydney Morning Herald 22/7/2013)
The long awaited gruesome murder trial delayed means the accused has to spend more time in custody waiting for his plight at the mercy of the system. A 6 months' delay means nothing if it is eventually a guilty verdict returned. Pre-trial hearings to precede the trial proper suggest that the defence will make some applications which include legal arguments to exclude certain evidence to be adduced by the Crown. I believe one of the applications should be a permanent stay of proceeding in light of the wide publicity of the case to the prejudice of the accused. The defence is likely to argue that the accused will not have a fair trial since the media reports have portrayed a case of callous murder prompted by greediness and jealousy. The prosecution will certainly rely on it as the motive of the murder. The likelihood of success in this kind of application is dim. Even if the accused is acquitted in the end, the prosecution can re-institute the proceeding against him. I am not trying to be sceptical. The evidence I read so far is circumstantial and it will come as no surprise to me if the jury cannot be able to reach a decision in the end. Let's wait and see what happens.
这个星期五去高院听会发现如何令你惊讶.
回覆刪除你就会发现是辩方还是控方赖皮.
话你知是控方向官申请不让媒体报道的.
之前已抹黑很多了, 还差这点吗?
你最有经验, 一听就明白了, 不要在这里估估吓..
如果你與本案有直接關係，在審結之前，請勿留言。我的評論都從看報導而來，毫無個人立場，避免看法偏頗。我對這件案沒有特別興趣，不會刻意去法庭看，估估下都幾好，可以用此測試自己的洞察力。
刪除你的網誌向公众开放, 欢迎留言. 还计较逆言吗? 没有恶意, 向你学习用中立的观点看问题.
回覆刪除控辩双方在庭上的辩论, 你经历过, 正常情况下, 媒体是更多报道控方的, 从媒体有限的报道普通人是无法了解接近事实的情况.
At the Committal Hearing, the prosecutor conceded there is no motive. Magistrate Andrews said: ''In my view, the case falls well short of being a strong Crown case.''He said he was satisfied Mr Xie had met the exceptional circumstances required for granting bail and he ordered him to put forward security amounting to $900,000.
He added that if a jury found the DNA evidence was not blood, that would prove ''fatal'' to the Crown case.
At the Supreme Court Hearing, the Crown are still scratching around for a case.
有空了解检控官的过往主打的案件, 就明白他是什么样的人了. 下面的连接多一点信息.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/lin-family-murder-accused-robert-xie-to-stand-trial/story-fnat79vb-1226540289534
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/accused-killer-of-lin-family-given-bail-as-crown-case-falls-well-short-20121220-2bpgh.html
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/xie-prosecutors-scratching-around-for-a-case-court-hears-20130320-2genc.html
You are quite right. Everyone can leave a comment in my blog. It is open to the public. However, there are certainly criteria I have to observe when a comment is left. I have to delete scandalous remarks and foul language. So far I have deleted 2. I don't mind if people criticise me or leave comments contrary to my view. In the preceding comment, I said "如果你與本案有直接關係，在審結之前，請勿留言". There are 2 conditions here I mentioned. The first one is you have direct involvement and the second one is before the trial is concluded. I have to observe the rule of sub judice. Since the trial is a live case before the court, I am not the prosecutor or the defence lawyer. I hold an impartial ground. I have commented a lot on the case after seeing the committal proceeding unveiling the evidence in the case and the justification of granting bail. As an independent blogger, I think I have done the utmost I can do. I do not take side and I would not involve to the extent of personal involvement by going to see the ancillary proceedings in court or conducting my own investigation of the case. I have to guard against over-commenting the case because I may trample the thin line of contempt of court.
刪除.
From what you said, I can see you have a personal involvement in the case. I have a different stance. I do not want to turn my blog into a forum involving in discussion of something the general public do not have the chance to get hold of. If you want to leave comment, by all means.