₦airaland Forum

City going 100mil on Grealish. Wow

Ebukacute:
sir. You don craze finish

Dibia Ebuka. We don see your work o.
You don carry juju dey nack Van Dijk all the way from Enugu

swiz123:
Wrong!!... beyond reasonable doubt is a point where the defendant's lawyer cannot make a reasonable defence to counter an evidence. What if the defendant says another person who john has offended got to John before him.... The burden to prove that no one got to John before the defendant is entirely on the prosecutor to prove. This is according to what Dayo said. I can't argue for another murder case without having the facts

What you wrote is a possibility even it's possible Andrew matcheted himself or Ogun the God of iron did it but the facts currently while not absolute will convict John unless there is a video recording of another assailant.

There is almost no conviction where you cannot make another theory pointing away from the convicted

iamoyindamola:
Vvd lead others follow, who be the second guy sef

With the gragra I will suspect Robertson you know say he dey always ginger

Ebukacute:
I had mine two months ago...
I cost me 108k in Enugu state .

That your Baba no fit nack you better JuJu to make it disappear
You had to waste 108 you fvck up guy

raumdeuter:
The number of times we will see this particular gif this season. I might even find a way to embed it in my signature with the Thiago Silva shedi balabala one

I know when it comes to this things u take no prisoners.

raumdeuter:
With the gragra I will suspect Robertson you know say he dey always ginger

The way the 2nd guy they slide they go if vvd no stand up quick na another injury

Swiz123

You know Derek Chauvin who killed George Floyd too could have argued that another ailment killed Floyd and not the fact that he kneeled on his throat for eternity. Which could be true. It's possible that while he was kneeling an unrelated medical issue was going on with Floyd which would have killed him even without Derek

Bring most criminal conviction without eye witness or confession there will always be a wiggle room and small possibility to deny but no one cares about absolute culpability, beyond reasonable is often enough

iamoyindamola:
That your Baba no fit nack you better JuJu to make it disappear
You had to waste 108 you fvck up guy

Amu gi dia!!!(your prick there)

Manchester City have made a £100million offer for Aston Villa's Jack Grealish.


You have £100m and you can either buy Grealish or Kane, who would you buy?

raumdeuter:
Dibia Ebuka. We don see your work o.
You don carry juju dey nack Van Dijk all the way from Enugu

Senior man he no gree settle the gods or ezekwensu wey rescue am from injury... If he no do the needful he would end up like your before before top 10 striker bairlotti.

Ebukacute:
Senior man he no gree settle the gods or ezekwensu wey rescue am from injury... If he no do the needful he would end up like your before before top 10 striker bairlotti.

See sharp guy, you don dey think of how we can monetize all these juju. Imagine make VVD settle you with just 1 week wage, Na Abba Kyari go dey sew your Agbada from now

Unlike segedinho wey be say na nack and chop grass wey no dey bring money

swiz123:
What evidence is circumstantial enough? If I go into someone's room and the person ends up dead. I was arrested and I claimed the person was dead already before I got there.... Won't they carryout autopsy to know the cause of death and probably the time he died?

Actually, what is reasonable or unreasonable doubt is at the discretion of the judge.. sometimes they can be faulty and that's why we have appellate courts

Even if autopsy says the person was strangled, you can also say maybe someone else strangled him
Even if Autopsy says the time of death was between 2 and 2:30, you can argue that you got there at 2:15 and you found the person dead possibly strangled by a ghost

raumdeuter:
See sharp uy, you don dey think of how we can monetize all these juju. Imagine make VVD settle you with just 1 week wage, Na Abba Kyari go dey sew your Agbada from now

Unlike segedinho wey be say na nack and chop grass wey no dey bring money

Lol my own nah chew bottle and vamoose ooo.... But if u go leave jand come home make we run collabo moneytise am ,we go blow quick also help guardiola win UCL.

BlueAngel444:
Manchester City have made a £100million offer for Aston Villa's Jack Grealish.


You have £100m and you can either buy Grealish or Kane, who would you buy?

Kane cost more than 100m na the issue be that

nihilistjnr:
The defendant doesn't get to find out what evidence the prosecutors are planning to use against him until discovery, which happens after arrest but before court trial.

The US courts have determined that there is enough evidence to issue a federal arrest warrant. Let Kyari go to yankee first, then you will see the evidence that the prosecutor intend to present at trial.

This is wrong. The defendants can get all the evidence the prosecution is planning to use in his absence. All he needs is a lawyer licenced to practice in that. He will retain the lawyer then the lawyer will file for request of evidence .
I am sure that they permit trial in absentia

nihilistjnr:
Kane cost more than 100m na the issue be that

Dortmund won't budge on their asking price for Erling considering the fact that the player is younger and proven in UCL and Bundesliga.

Amoto94:
Dortmund won't budge on their asking price for Erling considering the fact that the player is younger and proven in UCL and Bundesliga.

I don tire for this matter. They should fok off

Ebukacute:
Lol my own nah chew bottle and vamoose ooo.... But if u go leave jand come home make we run collabo moneytise am ,we go blow quick also help guardiola win UCL.

Someone don put chew bottle on youtube


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-W_LP4trhQ

pamcode:
Djokovic out. I didn't see this one coming, I was expecting a Golden slam. He might still get that Calendar Grand slam though. He is definitely surpassing Federer and Nadal.

Surprised cos I wanted him to do the Golden slam. Anyways, at least Zverev is through, I'd love for him to win it - at least as small compensation for all his grand slam disappointments.

timbros:
To show how important VVD is to the team, tell us where Liverpool was in the table immediately he got injured and let us compare it with their position at the end of the league.

That's a product of a league system that showed how Leicester subsequently fell off and some other strong teams lost the steam towards the end of the season and doesn't have anything to do with VVD.

With VVD starting the season, Liverpool finished 1st or 2nd while without him last season they dropped to 3rd with highest number of matches lost and goals conceded. Your guess is as good as mine.

It is more important to check the number of losses Liverpool had in the league with him and without him.

With VVD 1 loss in 5 matches.

Without VVD - 8 losses in 37 matches

Coupled with the fact that Liverpool never lost up to 9 matches in a league season since VVD joined and only happened when he injured.

I don't need to beg a Professor of Mathematics to conclude for you. So, Lilbros.

raumdeuter:
John had a machete with him so his DNA or prints will be on the machete. He could have claimed that by the time he caught up, he found Andrew already dead and he didn't know who did it.

Point is no one can say 100% that John did it, but there is a high likelihood that he did it which is all the judge and jury needed.

Like afrodoc has been saying, it doesn't have to be 100% absolute facts, just reasonable doubt is enough

If we are going by absolute very few criminal conviction will be made

I think we are at conflict as what could constitute a reasonable doubt. John having blood other than the victims blood on the matchete constitutes a reasonable doubt. The level of doubt required in a criminal proceedings is much more higher than a civil one.

Let's take Amadou Diallo's murder. Those police men walked because it couldn't be proved beyond reasonable doubt that they intentionally murdered Diallo. Diallo brought out his wallet to ID himself and those police men thought he was aiming for a gun. The fact that the 4 policemen shot him 49 times with semi automatic pistols, which indicated that they finished and reloaded and continued shooting did not withstand.

raumdeuter:
Swiz123

You know Derek Chauvin who killed George Floyd too could have argued that another ailment killed Floyd and not the fact that he kneeled on his throat for eternity. Which could be true. It's possible that while he was kneeling an unrelated medical issue was going on with Floyd which would have killed him even without Derek

Bring most criminal conviction without eye witness or confession there will always be a wiggle room and small possibility to deny but no one cares about absolute culpability, beyond reasonable is often enough

It was proved that Derek deprived Floyd of oxygen long enough to cause him serious harm. Anything Derek says would be unreasonable because what other sickness did he have that didn't kill him until knelt on his neck and asphyxiated him to death

Guess what their conversation is all about...
Tuchel -bakayoko you sure say jersey go reach u for dis team?
Bakayoko-(laugh) Oga I no go lie oo,I no sure.. Forget kounde,You fit try me for defence?
Batshuayi-gimme one month sir, I go prove to you say na batman be my second name

raumdeuter:
Someone don put chew bottle on youtube


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-W_LP4trhQ

(In lai Mohammed's voice) it is doctored

Nostradamus1:
This is wrong. The defendants can get all the evidence the prosecution is planning to use in his absence. All he needs is a lawyer licenced to practice in that. He will retain the lawyer then the lawyer will file for request of evidence .
I am sure that they permit trial in absentia

Read what you quoted again bro.

Exonerate1:
City going 100mil on Grealish. Wow

Person way Saka better pass

Ebukacute:
Guess what their conversation is all about...
Tuchel -bakayoko you sure say jersey go reach u for dis team?
Bakayoko-(laugh) Oga I no go lie oo,I no sure.. Forget kounde,You fit try me for defence?
Batshuayi-gimme one month sir, I go prove to you say na batman be my second name

Don't know what Tuchel says to these boys o, but did you see how Drinkwater played in that friendly

Spy360:
Person way Saka better pass

Saka

Why would Pep want to spend 100m on Grealish

He is likely to play him in left side of the midfield three

Pep probably going for false 9 this season as well, Torres, KDB, Sterling, Gabriel

swiz123:
That alone will not convict John. The will apply inductive reasoning to expand possibilities in order to remove any reasonable doubt. This is where they run a DNA on the blood on the cutlass and finger prints on the knob of the cutlass...

If it turns out to match John's and nobody else's, then the evidence has been proven beyond reasonable doubt which is the level of proof required to convict anyone of a CRIME.

If however another fingerprint appears on the knob of the cutlass, it is left on the prosecutor, not the defendant to make an arguement supported with evidences that will remove reasonable doubt. If they fail to clears doubts about the new finger print, the defendant walks...... nothing concern Judge, cos the burden to prove the case is entirely on the prosecutor.... Na law101 I just dey clear una

I am sorry to say with this one wen you type up there, you should have just stood by the stands. No be everything pesin dey know, sometimes you just stop, watch and learn. A rebuttal may be a waste of my time based on what I have just read up there.

swiz123:
The whole thing I mentioned about deductive reasoning is entirely hinged on the outcome of the case... That is the judgement.

Ok... Let's go to Psychology101... Deductive reasoning can only be true if the premise is true. If the premise is yet to be established to be true beyond all doubt, then deductive reasoning inferred from such premise becomes a fallacy. Fallacy is when an argument is hinged on a wrong premise.

Now in a court room, prior to the judges decision, all deductive reasoning are fallacious until the Judge establishes that all evidence/premise have been proven to be true beyond any reasonable doubt. Only then can deductive reasoning become accurate. Now the judge will convict a defendant based on the premise which is true.

Back to Kyari's case, the evidence currently provided by the FBI can never be enough to convict Kyari. Essentially, the judge can never practice deductive reasoning based on that inconclusive premise... Hope you get my point

Every evidence that is proven to be true is entered as an affidavit before cross examinations that requires deductive reasoning even start.. Stop abeg! I no get time today. Stop misinforming people after searching google..