- Joined
- May 7, 2011
- Messages
- 37,157
- Reaction score
- 29,681
They legally can't do that. If they show the evidence before the trial starts then that evidence becomes tainted and they can't use it in the case. It also allowed the lawyers to file for a mistrial and potential dismissal of charges as the jury is tainted. Remember when Lisa Wilkinson got up on stage and blurted out stuff about Brittany Higgins? Now the bloke is walking free because she tainted any potential jury and any fair prosecution.No matter what anyone says it only increases his popularity and cause, they can only extend for so long and to me if they had proof it would have been shown by now.
consider how bad the allegations are you’d want them to stick with solid proof which you’d have before locking him up.
maybe he was a flight risk but I doubt that.
If they release him then there's not sufficient evidence. But I personally think it's more likely that they are just delaying to finalise the investigation before they charge him. And when the courts finally decide to let him go, that's when he will be officially charged.