Chris Cairns Trial starts today

by kingraf Mon 05 Oct 2015, 11:53 am

Probably the biggest match/spot fixing trial in the sports history starts today. Okay, so technically not a match fixing trial (it's a perjury trial), but if found guilty of perjury, the inference will be that Chris Cairns, my favourite Kiwi cricketer of all time will be a confirmed match fixer. Bigger than that, he's almost certainly gonna be the biggest fish ever caught by the ACSU. Even bigger than Hansie and Azharaddin. Say it ain't so.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/newzealand/content/story/925607.html

by **LondonTiger** Mon 05 Oct 2015, 12:16 pm

Will be interesting, but how is Cairns a bigger fish than guys who captained India in 47 tests and 174 ODIs and South Africa in 53 tests and 138 ODIs

by kingraf Mon 05 Oct 2015, 12:28 pm

I wasn't clear. Not bigger in terms of player impact (although surely he was a better player than the chronically overrated Cronje?). But bigger in terms of him supposedly being higher up the fixing food chain than those two.

by **LondonTiger** Mon 05 Oct 2015, 3:06 pm

I am not sure it gets bigger than the captains of major sides. The influence they actually have to affect results is far greater than a mere player.

by **LondonTiger** Mon 30 Nov 2015, 11:21 am

BBC wrote:Former New Zealand cricket captain Chris Cairns has been found not guilty of perjury and perverting the course of justice.
Mr Cairns, 45, was cleared of falsely declaring under oath during a 2012 libel case that he had never cheated at cricket.
He had successfully sued Indian Premier League chairman Lalit Modi for accusing him on Twitter of match-fixing.
The retired all-rounder was cleared of all charges at Southwark Crown Court.

by kingraf Mon 30 Nov 2015, 11:23 am

LondonTiger wrote:
BBC wrote:Former New Zealand cricket captain Chris Cairns has been found not guilty of perjury and perverting the course of justice.
Mr Cairns, 45, was cleared of falsely declaring under oath during a 2012 libel case that he had never cheated at cricket.
He had successfully sued Indian Premier League chairman Lalit Modi for accusing him on Twitter of match-fixing.
The retired all-rounder was cleared of all charges at Southwark Crown Court.

While I'm glad he was found not guilty. I cant help feeling that he is in fact... guilty

by **LondonTiger** Mon 30 Nov 2015, 11:24 am

Note this only means the prosecution did not prove that he ahd actually cheated himself.

Their entire case was based on showing that he had recruited, or tried to recruit, others to fix games and thus creating sufficient circumstantial evidence to prove their case that he had lied in court and had actually directly cheated himself.

by kingraf Mon 30 Nov 2015, 11:35 am

LondonTiger wrote:Note this only means the prosecution did not prove that he ahd actually cheated himself.

Their entire case was based on showing that he had recruited, or tried to recruit, others to fix games and thus creating sufficient circumstantial evidence to prove their case that he had lied in court and had actually directly cheated himself.

I suspect it was always going to be very difficult to prove the case based on anecdotal evidence. The prosecution didn't help themselves though. Roping in Ricky Ponting to give testimony where he was basically present when McCullum received a call from Cairns. Or Bond, who's testimony revolves around him saying he called Cairns a cheat once.

by SimonofSurrey Mon 30 Nov 2015, 1:53 pm

What I think I'm reading here is that, while this verdict was that the Prosecution had failed to convince in this Case, beyond this Case some wider potential matchfixing concerns might remain. Is that a reasonable summary of the early reactions?

by kingraf Mon 30 Nov 2015, 2:02 pm

SimonofSurrey wrote:What I think I'm reading here is that, while this verdict was that the Prosecution had failed to convince in this Case, beyond this Case some wider potential matchfixing concerns might remain. Is that a reasonable summary of the early reactions?

If by doubts remain you mean "everyone really thinks he's guilty", then yes.

by **LondonTiger** Mon 30 Nov 2015, 2:27 pm

SimonofSurrey wrote:What I think I'm reading here is that, while this verdict was that the Prosecution had failed to convince in this Case, beyond this Case some wider potential matchfixing concerns might remain. Is that a reasonable summary of the early reactions?

This verdict would not preclude any other form of prosecution, court or ICC, for Cairns on grounds of involvement of match fixing (similar to Danish Kaneria). All it says is that the jury have deemed he did not lie in his libel case. (Or probably more accurately the prosecution had nbot proved he had lied)

by spudungeyee Thu 03 Dec 2015, 2:43 pm

Can't believe he got off, it was blatant fixing!!!

by Sponsored content

Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today

Re: Chris Cairns Trial starts today