Why did the 4 acquitted not stay back for solidarity?

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Fairy_KimBokJoo

@Fairy_KimBokJoo

Navigator

Posted: 7 years ago

#21

All of them should be in jail! Participating in the crime is just as bad as being the criminal! Sickening how people are defending them! Such morally bankrupt, entitled people! In such cases, no witnesses are to be believed! They are always bribed or threatened! Our judiciary is the worst!

Quote

Erika

@roni_berna

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 7 years ago

#22

LOL! That's a court not a school where I will stay back till my friend doesn't come out after getting scolding from the principal. 😆

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

TheRager

@TheRager

Achiever

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#23

So all sympathy was only on SM? Salman is at the end of his career. Maybe they are thinking even if he goes to jail Tiger and Varun will get Eid release and make as much money.

And we can expect nothing from Saif and co. Even today Kareena was releasing Taimur pics. I don't think they would notice Saif either way or vice versa.

Quote

Deviant_Pixel

@Deviant_Pixel

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#24

Originally posted by: TheBoss
If I read correctly they were a witness and unless they actually took the shot, or helped skin the animal they are not guilty. Yes they shouldn't have gone but we can argue this on moral basis but the law does not punish witnesses.

They were there in the jeep and knew the intention was to hunt. Intention = accessory or accomplice. Actually in many countries , this equates to being an accessory and therefore they should be convicted. They certainly were not witnesses. A witness is different from knowingly accompanying someone on a hunt - he was carrying a gun unless people just go out to eat with a gun.

Saif of all people , whose wife is actually close to Salman should have stayed but I guess that's life 😆

Edited by bafflingtulip - 7 years ago

Quote

1061832

Suspended

Posted: 7 years ago

#25

Originally posted by: bafflingtulip

They were there in the jeep and knew the intention was to hunt. Intention = accessory or accomplice. Actually in many countries , this equates to being an accessory and therefore they should be convicted. Moreover I would take eye witness accounts with a pinch of salt in terms of them not aiming to take a shot, my bet is they did. They knew exactly what they were heading to do and deserve the same fate.

Saif of all people , whose wife is actually close to Salman should have stayed but I guess that's life😆

KAreena has never been close to Salman. It is her sister Salman has soft spot for. Kareena just knows how to take advantage of it. Saif ke liye yeh dan to khandaani sport hai shikar karma. There is no doubt that he was actively involved how convenient that he is such a has been nobody that nobody remembers or recognises him.

Quote

Deviant_Pixel

@Deviant_Pixel

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#26

Originally posted by: ManwaLagge
KAreena has never been close to Salman. It is her sister Salman has soft spot for. Kareena just knows how to take advantage of it. Saif ke liye yeh dan to khandaani sport hai shikar karma. There is no doubt that he was actively involved how convenient that he is such a has been nobody that nobody remembers or recognises him.

Agreed. Yet his wife has been given work by Salman. Anyway what is most amazing is Kareena did not go with him to court. Unless I am mistaken 🤣

Quote

TheBoss

@TheBoss

Stunner

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#27

Originally posted by: bafflingtulip

They were there in the jeep and knew the intention was to hunt. Intention = accessory or accomplice. Actually in many countries , this equates to being an accessory and therefore they should be convicted. They certainly were not witnesses. A witness is different from knowingly accompanying someone on a hunt - he was carrying a gun unless people just go out to eat with a gun.

Saif of all people , whose wife is actually close to Salman should have stayed but I guess that's life 😆

Yes that's true. But witness can also he hostile. It's very hard to prove prove intent hence accessory to crime. They could simply say they were tagging along for a pleasure trip. His actions are his own only and was not their collective decision. The crown knows it is very very hard to prove such offenses without the lack of witnesses.

Quote

PhunsukWangdu

@PhunsukWangdu

Voyager

Posted: 7 years ago

#28

Anyone knows where was this witness twice during Rajasthan court trials? Why was Salman acquitted then?

Quote

Deviant_Pixel

@Deviant_Pixel

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#29

Originally posted by: TheBoss

Yes that's true. But witness can also he hostile. It's very hard to prove prove intent hence accessory to crime. They could simply say they were tagging along for a pleasure trip. His actions are his own only and was not their collective decision. The crown knows it is very very hard to prove such offenses without the lack of witnesses.

Yeah and I also think due to the chinkara hunting charges, his credibility is already highly questionable