For a laugh I sat in for five minutes of the "Jetcorp Scandal".
In 1992, Grimwade was charged with fraud and conspiracy for his involvement in a false prospectus issued for an entity called Jetcorp Australia Unit Trust.
[1]
The trial became the longest running criminal trial in Victoria history.
[2] After a first jury had sat for seven months, Grimwade's wife died and he was granted a new trial.
[3] The second jury sat for over nine months, during which time the judge and some jurors were absent at various times for medical reasons.
[4]
The length of the trial was exacerbated by the defence strategy of continually challenging Crown statements, with the result that the Crown was required to strictly prove each and every bit of evidence irrespective of whether it was in dispute or germane to the defence.
[5]
This strategy ultimately succeeded. Grimwade was found guilty on nineteen counts of fraud and conspiracy,
[6] but t
he verdict was overturned on appeal, the appellate judge ruling that the case had become so convoluted that it had become impossible for the jury to render a proper verdict.
How did the judge get to claim it was impossible to render a proper verdict. Not because the prosecution did anything wrong. Also, it was not impossible.
Grimwade had enough money to challenge everything and the defence was actually waffling on about the concept of justice and nothing else while I was there. Lawyers know better these days. Go for the simple, direct kill shot if possible Once it gets complex it can easily get derailed.