King of Hits.co.uk - Your Views Messageboard

IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Home

Forums

	Messageboards	Categories Show latest posts

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register. Lost Password?

Messageboards

King of Hits

Your Views Messageboard

Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"

Name:

Subject:

Boardcode:

Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons





More Smilies

[b]John Marsh wrote:[/b]
[quote]None of this case makes any sense, the complainant, police, CPS initial judge then the appeal court. Disclosing or not disclosing suing does not seem something that affects the evidence or as the case was "no evidence" as appears word only trial.

I thought in English Law once there are twelve individuals taken from the street their ability to get the verdict right in court was equivalent to the christian god of all knowing, complete understanding etc and thus their decison could not be questioned unless on a point of law or new evidence. How can suing be new evidence? 
Now the appeal court is doing what it should of been doing from it's inception and acknowledging mistakes even in the jury can happen. There is no way that a jury of twelve can become a magical group with god like ability and knowledge.

Well done appeal court and glad the conviction was quashed as the case was based on no evidence as per the media report (All we ever have to go on!).

As to guilt and innocence in these cases on word only often no one can ever really know but the manner, time and availability of compensation plus the system using anonymity to cover up any research into a complainant's known or findable character indicates a strong pointer in many cases to the accused been innocent of at least the reported crime.[/quote]

Enter code here

Topic History of: Accuser was after the money
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
honey!oh sugar sugar.	Randall wrote: honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote: How does the immigration thing work,Randall? Illegal immigrant woman makes sexual allegation to the police. The case takes time to get to court, so the complainant can't have a threat of deportation hanging over her for all that time: being removed from the country or held in an immigration detention centre would torpedo the prosecution. Likewise, you can't present an illegal immigrant witness. That's an open goal for cross examination about improper motive. So the cops or CPS, I'm not sure which, pull strings to regularise the complainant's status. Let's not forget the compensation money. For a desperate third world immigrant, this is an absolute fucking jackpot. And all you have to do is tell a little story and squeeze out a few tears if you can. Cops/CPS get what they want too: a compliant witness over whom they hold something. Oh sorry no, a vulnerable witness because of her illegal immigration status. It really is arse backwards these days. Thanks. Its very clever, isn't it?
Randall	honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote: How does the immigration thing work,Randall? Illegal immigrant woman makes sexual allegation to the police. The case takes time to get to court, so the complainant can't have a threat of deportation hanging over her for all that time: being removed from the country or held in an immigration detention centre would torpedo the prosecution. Likewise, you can't present an illegal immigrant witness. That's an open goal for cross examination about improper motive. So the cops or CPS, I'm not sure which, pull strings to regularise the complainant's status. Let's not forget the compensation money. For a desperate third world immigrant, this is an absolute fucking jackpot. And all you have to do is tell a little story and squeeze out a few tears if you can. Cops/CPS get what they want too: a compliant witness over whom they hold something. Oh sorry no, a vulnerable witness because of her illegal immigration status. It really is arse backwards these days.
honey!oh sugar sugar.	Randall wrote: andrew wrote: Aren't they all ? No, I don't think so Andrew. Other motivations/explanations are - mental derangement the accuser seeking an excuse for his or her own poor life choices or criminal behaviour malice to a former partner or to an enemy as an escape from social embarrassment and shame (girl caught cheating then claims it was rape) to gain advantage in divorce or family court proceedings bonkers extreme feminist ideas of what constitutes criminal behaviour between men and women an attempt to resolve irregular residence and immigration status (very common in the African community) honest mistake And of course, some accusations are true and accurate. Without a requirement to consider supporting evidence in trials, we have no way of knowing what cases fall into which category. How does the immigration thing work,Randall?
Randall	andrew wrote: Aren't they all ? No, I don't think so Andrew. Other motivations/explanations are - mental derangement the accuser seeking an excuse for his or her own poor life choices or criminal behaviour malice to a former partner or to an enemy as an escape from social embarrassment and shame (girl caught cheating then claims it was rape) to gain advantage in divorce or family court proceedings bonkers extreme feminist ideas of what constitutes criminal behaviour between men and women an attempt to resolve irregular residence and immigration status (very common in the African community) honest mistake And of course, some accusations are true and accurate. Without a requirement to consider supporting evidence in trials, we have no way of knowing what cases fall into which category.
John Marsh	None of this case makes any sense, the complainant, police, CPS initial judge then the appeal court. Disclosing or not disclosing suing does not seem something that affects the evidence or as the case was "no evidence" as appears word only trial. I thought in English Law once there are twelve individuals taken from the street their ability to get the verdict right in court was equivalent to the christian god of all knowing, complete understanding etc and thus their decison could not be questioned unless on a point of law or new evidence. How can suing be new evidence? Now the appeal court is doing what it should of been doing from it's inception and acknowledging mistakes even in the jury can happen. There is no way that a jury of twelve can become a magical group with god like ability and knowledge. Well done appeal court and glad the conviction was quashed as the case was based on no evidence as per the media report (All we ever have to go on!). As to guilt and innocence in these cases on word only often no one can ever really know but the manner, time and availability of compensation plus the system using anonymity to cover up any research into a complainant's known or findable character indicates a strong pointer in many cases to the accused been innocent of at least the reported crime.