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]JK2006 wrote:[/b]
[quote]Good point Honey; in my experience it's when they try to embellish with added detail that they fall apart; the Weathermen false accuser, for example, could never have guessed we'd track down that obscure interview he gave 30 years ago. But his description of my home was incredibly wrong - he couldn't have known I've lived in the same house all these years and his description of a flat on the second floor of an apartment block was way off and he went on Google maps, having found the address, and described in detail the view of the park but the park was impossible to see from any window in the block he named. The sad part is - most innocent people would never have examined every word - as I did this time around, having learned from NOT doing that 20 years ago. I just hope every other person falsely accused thinks of checking this site and learns from my mistakes 20 years ago, corrected in 2018. Of course it doesn't help when you have bent cops assisting the statement (see Vile Pervert; The Musical when a bent cop asks what colour was my front door and waves his blue tie around. It was only long after that I spotted that - and my door had been white in the period claimed by the False Accuser - of whose claims I was found Guilty).

And after a verdict it's all down to the over worked, under paid CCRC who simply cannot cope with the millions of miscarriages of justice and tend to say "the jury would have found you guilty anyway".[/quote]

Enter code here

Topic History of: Esther Baker investigated by police
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
JK2006	Good point Honey; in my experience it's when they try to embellish with added detail that they fall apart; the Weathermen false accuser, for example, could never have guessed we'd track down that obscure interview he gave 30 years ago. But his description of my home was incredibly wrong - he couldn't have known I've lived in the same house all these years and his description of a flat on the second floor of an apartment block was way off and he went on Google maps, having found the address, and described in detail the view of the park but the park was impossible to see from any window in the block he named. The sad part is - most innocent people would never have examined every word - as I did this time around, having learned from NOT doing that 20 years ago. I just hope every other person falsely accused thinks of checking this site and learns from my mistakes 20 years ago, corrected in 2018. Of course it doesn't help when you have bent cops assisting the statement (see Vile Pervert; The Musical when a bent cop asks what colour was my front door and waves his blue tie around. It was only long after that I spotted that - and my door had been white in the period claimed by the False Accuser - of whose claims I was found Guilty). And after a verdict it's all down to the over worked, under paid CCRC who simply cannot cope with the millions of miscarriages of justice and tend to say "the jury would have found you guilty anyway".
honey!oh sugar sugar.	JK2006 wrote: Is this a new story or just a rehashed old one? If indeed police are starting to look at false accusers and belatedly prosecuting them I have a number of very dodgy characters they should examine - the one who raped his 10 year old sister when he was 20; the one who claimed to have lost his virginity to a girl of similar age when he was 14 (we found her; it was just another lie; they were both just below 16 but it's still child rape); the one who said he'd been the lead singer of my group The Weathermen - false accusers always get it wrong. Sadly no. False accusers may well be "right" most of the time. I would imagine that most of them are very careful with their invented evidence. After all, there is a lot of cash/kudos at stake.
Jo	JK2006 wrote: Is this a new story or just a rehashed old one? I can't find any previous press reports, but did find this reference in two related blogposts from November 2018: "Now it is revealed she is under investigation herself by two police forces, one for nearly a year." In the first blogpost the blogger apparently quotes the IICSA chair Alexis Jay concerning a Staffordshire police investigation into Baker for perverting the course of justice, though the quote only seems to appear on the blog and nowhere else online. IICSA: Unsubstantiated ‘Rape’ Accuser Esther Baker Under Police Investigation The Wacky World of Esther Baker Judging from an e-mail by her quoted in the second blogpost, she's highly articulate.
Randall	I can hear the victim activists' response already: "Police want victims to prove their rape report or be jailed. It's rape all over again!" Yeah, yeah, fuck off. Why not start with the no-brainers: accusers who told provable lies, where there is evidence of their deceit? Danny Day is one example. The woman who accused Mark Pearson (whose name is easily found online) is another. What on earth is the reason for not prosecuting a woman who accused a man of sexually assaulting her, but is shown clear as a bell on CCTV to be lying?
JK2006	Is this a new story or just a rehashed old one? If indeed police are starting to look at false accusers and belatedly prosecuting them I have a number of very dodgy characters they should examine - the one who raped his 10 year old sister when he was 20; the one who claimed to have lost his virginity to a girl of similar age when he was 14 (we found her; it was just another lie; they were both just below 16 but it's still child rape); the one who said he'd been the lead singer of my group The Weathermen - false accusers always get it wrong.