ChatterBank5 mins ago
Guilty Until Proven Innocent?
I cannot imagine the mental anguish this poor young man has had to endure for the past two years following an entirely made-up and malicious accusation of rape.
http://
Are we getting to the point where there is an assumption on the part of the police of guilt, and that in some cases (I said some - I would have put it in italics if I knew how to), evidence to the contrary is a little inconvenient? It certainly would appear so in this case.
http://
Are we getting to the point where there is an assumption on the part of the police of guilt, and that in some cases (I said some - I would have put it in italics if I knew how to), evidence to the contrary is a little inconvenient? It certainly would appear so in this case.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Deskdiary. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'm afraid to say it but I think society also has a role to play in this.
Of late we have seen no end of cases (often historic) involving some sort of sexual issue. The Police have been vilified by the public for their handling (not bringing to Court) previous cases. I suspect that there is more than an element of 'must prosecute' to avoid this.
However, deliberately falsifying evidence must result in Jail time for all those involved, the Police, the CPS and the accuser.
Of late we have seen no end of cases (often historic) involving some sort of sexual issue. The Police have been vilified by the public for their handling (not bringing to Court) previous cases. I suspect that there is more than an element of 'must prosecute' to avoid this.
However, deliberately falsifying evidence must result in Jail time for all those involved, the Police, the CPS and the accuser.
"The judge called for inquiry of the 'highest level' of Crown Prosecution Service" - quite right, the CPS are staffed with legal types show could not get a proper job. They are riddled with right on lefties and other assorted weirdos with an axe to grind. Before anyone calls me names, I know, I have first hand experience. Plod ain't much better, I was actually trialed with zero evidence and the police went along with it. Too gutless to stand up to the CPS who had decided to prosecute me. I suffered 8 months of anguish and 3 attempts at trail before thankfully I came before the beaks with some common and was acquitted. Once again the CPS and plods where royally leathered by the bench for dragging an innocent man over the coals on the say so of one person with no corroboration or evidence. You may wonder where some of my views come from on here, now you have some explanation. I did not suffer anything like as much as this poor bloke but I do understand how it happens.
// The Police have been vilified by the public for their handling (not bringing to Court) previous cases. I suspect that there is more than an element of 'must prosecute' to avoid this. However, deliberately falsifying evidence must result in Jail time for all those involved, the Police, the CPS and the accuser.//
completely out of it - read the article
//Police have been vilified by the public for their handling (not bringing to Court) previous cases. // CPS bring the case not the police - this has been the case (ha! pun intended) since 1984
// I suspect that there is more than an element of 'must prosecute' to avoid this. // - correcticus ! DPP told the CPS to bring more cases. But if you do that - then more iffy doubtful cases come to court and there are more acquittals and not less. - I pointed this out to the DPP and no one in her office could understand the least mathematical argument. Think Sir Humphrey murmuring- "wot is dat den minister - wot he say?"
//However, deliberately falsifying evidence must result in Jail time for all those involved, the Police, the CPS and the accuser.//- er yeah but there is no element of falsifying evidence here - there is non-disclosure. Non disclosure has been around since at least the 70s and before - see In the Name of the Father ( non disclosure in the IRA bomb cases).
oph and whilst I am here - the charging criteria for Perjury is that the case was successful ( the perjured evidence led to a conviction or finding of civil liability - see Archer, Tommy Sheridan, and Aitken cases )
oh and before I finish - there was a change of prosecutor - and the next day a change in the decision not to release evidence....did he jump or was he pushed ?
completely out of it - read the article
//Police have been vilified by the public for their handling (not bringing to Court) previous cases. // CPS bring the case not the police - this has been the case (ha! pun intended) since 1984
// I suspect that there is more than an element of 'must prosecute' to avoid this. // - correcticus ! DPP told the CPS to bring more cases. But if you do that - then more iffy doubtful cases come to court and there are more acquittals and not less. - I pointed this out to the DPP and no one in her office could understand the least mathematical argument. Think Sir Humphrey murmuring- "wot is dat den minister - wot he say?"
//However, deliberately falsifying evidence must result in Jail time for all those involved, the Police, the CPS and the accuser.//- er yeah but there is no element of falsifying evidence here - there is non-disclosure. Non disclosure has been around since at least the 70s and before - see In the Name of the Father ( non disclosure in the IRA bomb cases).
oph and whilst I am here - the charging criteria for Perjury is that the case was successful ( the perjured evidence led to a conviction or finding of civil liability - see Archer, Tommy Sheridan, and Aitken cases )
oh and before I finish - there was a change of prosecutor - and the next day a change in the decision not to release evidence....did he jump or was he pushed ?
A case like this, where evidence exists demonstrating the man's innocence, strikes me as fairly exceptional and certainly quite shocking. It seems different, to me, from cases with a lack of high-quality evidence, so I don't agree that it fits into any general pattern.
But to be sure the police and the CPS have felt under pressure to do something about the incredibly low rate of convictions in rape cases. Their chosen answer -- prosecuting cases that a jury would throw out instantly because there simply isn't any evidence -- isn't very effective, it seems, and could damage even more people's lives. But what other answer is there?
"Innocent until proven guilty" isn't an excuse to never investigate allegations, or to stop believing the complainants altogether.
But to be sure the police and the CPS have felt under pressure to do something about the incredibly low rate of convictions in rape cases. Their chosen answer -- prosecuting cases that a jury would throw out instantly because there simply isn't any evidence -- isn't very effective, it seems, and could damage even more people's lives. But what other answer is there?
"Innocent until proven guilty" isn't an excuse to never investigate allegations, or to stop believing the complainants altogether.
What I certainly agree with ymb is that the answer to a low rate of rape convictions is certainly *not* to continue lowering the required standards of evidence. Perhaps there's a side benefit of sorts, of investigating such cases, if the jury can effectively return a verdict of "not guilty but don't do it again", but innocent men can get caught up in that too.
So it's difficult, and horrible, and nobody wins. For every TTT who is prosecuted wrongly, there are victims who are denied justice -- and yes, I use victims here, although by and large I agree with Naomi that we should be careful to use it in any particular case.
So it's difficult, and horrible, and nobody wins. For every TTT who is prosecuted wrongly, there are victims who are denied justice -- and yes, I use victims here, although by and large I agree with Naomi that we should be careful to use it in any particular case.
Latest Posts
News12 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Are The West In The Grip Of The Woke...
News18 mins ago
