Quizzes & Puzzles62 mins ago
31 People Charged With Child Sex Offences
Found this on the BBC news website yet more of the same
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by max137. 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.dannyk13
/// Only a suggestion AOG.If you really want to know contact the relevant police force. ///
Mamyalynne
/// Contact a lawyer, how does anyone here know the reason
why? ///
The usual answers one has come to expect from those who are not very happy that such news is reported on.
Mind you they have had to endure the reporting of a terrorist attack and these child fiddlers all in the same week.
Not much support for their Liberal agenda.
/// Only a suggestion AOG.If you really want to know contact the relevant police force. ///
Mamyalynne
/// Contact a lawyer, how does anyone here know the reason
why? ///
The usual answers one has come to expect from those who are not very happy that such news is reported on.
Mind you they have had to endure the reporting of a terrorist attack and these child fiddlers all in the same week.
Not much support for their Liberal agenda.
"Contact a lawyer, how does anyone here know the reason why [they haven't been named]?
There is a multitude of possible reasons. The most usual is that of the age of the defendants themselves. But anything which might lead to the identity of minors will cause the judge to order their names be withheld. More than that, there could be reasons why, if they are identified in the press, they may not receive a fair trial.
The "alleged" vs "actual" is interesting. It is my view that all charges are "allegations" until proven. If you visit a a court you will see the participants (advocates, judges and magistrates) careful to ensure that the charges remain "alleged" during trials. You will hear them speak of the "alleged victim" and the "alleged perpetrator" (among other things). The only time you will not hear that is when the Crown is putting its case. You will then hear (for example) "The Crown says that Joe Bloggs assaulted Bert Higgins. We say that he hit him over the head with a bottle."
There is a multitude of possible reasons. The most usual is that of the age of the defendants themselves. But anything which might lead to the identity of minors will cause the judge to order their names be withheld. More than that, there could be reasons why, if they are identified in the press, they may not receive a fair trial.
The "alleged" vs "actual" is interesting. It is my view that all charges are "allegations" until proven. If you visit a a court you will see the participants (advocates, judges and magistrates) careful to ensure that the charges remain "alleged" during trials. You will hear them speak of the "alleged victim" and the "alleged perpetrator" (among other things). The only time you will not hear that is when the Crown is putting its case. You will then hear (for example) "The Crown says that Joe Bloggs assaulted Bert Higgins. We say that he hit him over the head with a bottle."
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.