On day three of Nick Adderley's gross misconduct hearing, his defence said claims about his naval service in two published books did not come from him.
Of course, as per yesterday, he is refusing to be cross-examined, so we aren't going to hear answers to any questions at all, comical or serious.
The question I would like to hear the answer to is "did you write your personal statement to the PFC Panel?". Because if he did, he's burnt toast.
Something that I wasn't aware of until yesterday pm is that the standard of proof in this event is the civil one - balance of probability - not the criminal one - beyond reasonable doubt. So, I rather suspect, he is finished anyway. But it has to be recognised that the matter is a bit more complicated than that. The CPS will, or should, be watching closely, and the defence objective is mainly to deter them from pressing on with later criminal proceedings (with the higher standard of proof) by implying that successful prosecution would be unlikely to be achieved.
Of course, as per yesterday, he is refusing to be cross-examined, so we aren't going to hear answers to any questions at all, comical or serious.
The question I would like to hear the answer to is "did you write your personal statement to the PFC Panel?". Because if he did, he's burnt toast.
Something that I wasn't aware of until yesterday pm is that the standard of proof in this event is the civil one - balance of probability - not the criminal one - beyond reasonable doubt. So, I rather suspect, he is finished anyway. But it has to be recognised that the matter is a bit more complicated than that. The CPS will, or should, be watching closely, and the defence objective is mainly to deter them from pressing on with later criminal proceedings (with the higher standard of proof) by implying that successful prosecution would be unlikely to be achieved.
Exactly that, and if he can derail matters as he has tried to do with technicalities then he can avoid justice.