Stephen Stockwell

You're like, how does perjury work again?

You know, is this something that's going on out there?

I can really see how they've ended up in this situation.

So I do feel very sorry for them.

And I'm sure that juror feels terrible as well.

There may have been other jurors who were like, oh, thank God, I was going for two months.

It's over.

So yeah, we'll see.

Another question, Eva, that we've been sent in from Liz, and this is on the, you know, kind of basically on this juror doing their own research.

She's wondered how these jurors ended up doing this research themselves, but more importantly, how could they have found out this information without causing a mistrial?

Yeah.

And what you're describing there where there's the parties kind of discussing with the judge how to answer a question, I remember a really specific example from

this case, because it's something that we answered on the pod in a kind of very cheeky way.

There was a question from the jury to the judge asking about whether or not blood found at Shree Glastonbury's house matched Geoffrey McLean's blood.

So we'd heard during the trial that police had gone to Shree Glastonbury's house.

They had done the investigation there and they'd found a tiny spot of blood near one of the posts of the carport.

And the jury was asking, was that Geoffrey McLean's blood?

And Justice Kimber said to the barrister in the room, he said, hey, look, what I want to do when I answer this question is I want to point to the prosecution opening and say, hey, in the prosecution opening, you heard that you got to see evidence that this blood was Geoffrey McLean's.

And Marie Shaw, who was the defence barrister for Cherie Glastonbury, kind of opposed that answer saying, well, no, I don't think you should answer the question like that.

We wouldn't support you answering that question.