Tesco fraud trial

collapses spectacularly. 

Who would have thought?

The SFO are really not good at this stuff. Poor buggers won't even get their costs back.

Fraud trials are a bit biblical TBH 


You sow what you reap in defence costs 

who would have thought?


everybody that's been alive since the 1980s and most other people. That's who.


Shower of shit infested piss.

You sow what you reap in defence costs 


except you don't. You tend to reap what you sow.


but even then, in SFO cases you just get fucked for a decade while they waste taxpayers' money then they lose

You tend to reap what you sow.

And if it's a pig of a case they can't bring home the bacon?

This is why I don’t do fraud trials. Those I’ve seen tend to take on a strange momentum and end up lasting epic amounts of time. I can’t get enthusiastic about the subject matter either. Shame, as they should appeal to my inner geek. 

When I was at Uni/Bar School, I clerked cases, and sat behind Adrian Darbishire, who I think  is a former Big 4 chartered accountant, truly brilliant. Managed to get a not guilty for a a guy number one one on the indictment in a 10 handed conspiracy to supply class A at night clubs. Year long surillence, test purchases, bugging of cars, and homes ( audio and video). Defendant had a chauffeur ,( Roller no less) , 250 k, and thousands of pills, and kilos of coke found in possesion. 6 month trial, Judge gives an indication that if defendant is found guilty he will start at 20 years. PII involved, all stuff that would make a great film. Not guilty verdict in the face of overwhelming evidence. I was hooked from thereon in.

@ Bailey, aren't fraud trials even on LA, incredibly lucrative. The issue I have is the jury mostly won't have a clue , despite best efforts of the crown to make the case and present it "simply"

Some are LA but some defendants pay privately. I didn’t do crime for the money though. I find fraud dull so I didn’t carve out a specialisation in it.