The Unsafe Verdict
Unsurprisingly, this is the option that tends to be used the most frequent grounds for appeal. An unsafe verdict is exactly that – a verdict which is not safe, and probably should never have happened. In the case of Kristian, how the verdict of guilty was found in his case was beyond anyone, and it was clearly an unsafe verdict.
In order to challenge a verdict as being unsafe, it is the duty of the petitioning party to demonstrate to the court that the verdict was not cast iron. This can stem initially from the lack of a unanimous verdict (uncertainty amongst the jury), and move onto more serious matters of challenging the evidence itself.
In considering whether the verdict was unsafe, the judge at the pre-hearing must weigh up all the factors. One would like to believe that the judge will conduct a fair and balanced review of the material of the case, but it invariably comes down to something as simple as; was the original judge a close friend of the review judge? Cynical? Yes; add a corrupt police department to the wayward legal system, with a smattering of injustice and a tablespoon of lying deviants. Once baked you'll find a nice golden cynicism drizzled in a healthy sauce of disgust.