I've been watching this one since it caught my dirty little eye, I must say.
I have no idea if it is a case of mistaken identity or not but I really do wish that I'd been a member of that Jury. It's the only way I'd ever know all the evidence to say yay or nay. Plus, I'd have seen the piccies........
Ethel, if that is the case, then that is my point, apparently she had photographic evidence on her phone, I do not wihs to put anyone down but there is still just that thought in my mind.
I don't think her mobile phone picture was of him actually doing the dirty deed, it was just a photo she took so she'd recognise him again. She claimed she did recognise him. He said it wasn't him. The police had not bothered to keep their own CCTV footage (sounds like they are casual about this sort of complaint). The court decided it couldn't decide who was telling the truth so the defendant got the benefit of the doubt (which is what defendants are supposed to get). I'd probably have done the same; I don't think I would have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt.