No, it goes from the time the 'offence' was committed. She will still be entitled to anonymity.Would that mean she can be named when AJ is proven innocent?
No, it goes from the time the 'offence' was committed. She will still be entitled to anonymity.Would that mean she can be named when AJ is proven innocent?
Could it be the CPS pushing it back?Doubt the prosecution or the Judge will care much about what Johnson wants. It will be the prosecution who requested it be put that. The only reason they'd do that is if they haven't finished putting the case together. Won't take till feburary to get all the lab results back, surely they've been back weeks. I can only assume they're struggling to put a case together.
Could it be the CPS pushing it back?
I'd eat a mile of her **** just to see where it come from.

Sorry guys but we don't know who has asked for the delay or why. Might even be because they're hearing it elsewhere and that coty hasn't got a free week (if the trial is expected to go that long?) until then.
I know no more than anyone on here but assuming it's the CPS wanting time might well be just wishful thinking
I don't think defendants can request trial adjournments mate. can't find anything saying they can or any reference to a trail where it's happend
About 10 years ago I was named as a witness in a trial that was put back 4 times at the request of the defence . The final date of the trial was nearly 18 months after the initial report of the crime. In the end I was never called as a witness as the defendant changed his plea to guilty at the very start of the trial. That's not a comment on whether AJ is innocent or guilty, just an example of trials being put back at the request of the defence.
I stand corrected.
For what sort of reasons?
didn't happen with that young footballer though, his mate got off but he got done for rape and now he is trying to clear his name. (cant remember it myself off hand)A couple of good over the thumb rules:
1. Delay almost always favours the defendant.
2. If there is a way to **** it up, the police and prosecution will find it. Their consistency here is truly amazing.
As for my two bob's (again), without good dna evidence, it's her word against his and she will lose. Of course, I have no idea if the evidence is there or not.
Assuming AJ is acquitted can he then claim back his legal costs and if so who will be paying that. Us Taxpayers or the lass and her family?