Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Robert Green jailed for 12 months
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
veritas |
it fascinated me because I have been through something similar over the past 4 years...defending an old lady in a church who was accused of stealing a huge amount of money.
The whole matter spiraled out of control as rumour after rumour spread and dozens of people simply believed what they had been told..yet there was no proof...no interest from the police...and when it finally went to court and the accusers admitted it was all false..there wasn't even money there to steal...they turned around after and claimed they were nobbled in the court and the solicitors were corrupt and so on..setting up websites ..never ending.
Opened my eyes as to how easy it is to manipulate a bunch of well meaning people.
But Green could be entirely right and just not presenting his case properly. The appeal should be interesting. |
|
Jim |
Thanks for all your work on this, Veritas.
I'm coming to think you may be more right that I am.
For one thing, I didn't know about the injunction, which may help explain a few things.
We'll see what happens on appeal.
Best Wishes,
Jim |
|
veritas |
(the hair bit was a Joke Joyce/Jim) 
I believe there is a 'breach of the peace" if he has been distributing leaflets that defame many people including sheriffs, senior law officer etc.
As far as I read (but correct me)..he got 9 months for 'breach of the peace' and says he never received an injunction..and presumably the injunction was being served to prevent him distributing leaflets and he also breached his bail conditions. Claiming you didn't get an in junction (possible) will not invalidate that injunction.
Frankly I cannot see why his solicitor who is a QC could not present the evidence Robert Green says he has, to disprove that he was breaching the peace by distributing leaflets. Maybe during the appeal.
I don;t know if what he says is true or false...but as I say Green does not present an iota of proof in any of his talks on radio or videos. He just says the abuse was perpetuated by a number of people because the girl told him so.
It just does not ring true that a child could remember such extraordinary details. She could however be coached which is common.
Surely all the people he claims were abusers are entitled to the protection of the law by not having someone on this campaign to accuse without evidence.
All this weaving together of separate components do not make a conspiracy.
I've searched and searched the net (and now I'm bored with the case) and find all sorts of claims on websites including the official one...and what it all boils down to is a girl who is mentally 'challenged' making claims of abuse (which certainly happened..her father)but there is no other evidence.
I'm prepared to change my mind though if someone offers more..  |
|
Jim |
Thanks Veritas,
You make very many fair points and it is no part of my case that these accusations Robert Green is making are true, nevertheless there are four points I would like to make.
Firstly, as a matter of logic, to conclude that because Green supporters run ads for "miracle hair growth" and other such specious nonsense therefore Green must be wrong in his allegations is an ad hominem fallacy.
Secondly, as you may already know, private prosecutions can be taken over by the CPS and closed down, even if you can afford them. This makes them highly risky.
Thirdly, you write:
"His jailing was for breaching bail conditions"
On my reading he got three months for breaching bail conditions, yes, but also nine months for breach of the peace, making up twelve months in total.
Finally, you write:
"There is still a law against criminal defamation."
Indeed, but then, why wasn't it used?
Best Wishes,
Jim |
|
veritas |
I also note a vast number of Green supporters also support the Illuminat/Rothschild/ Jewish world control conspracy, the 'climate scam' comspiracy, Ron Paul and are anti feminists etc etc blah blah and also run aids for 'miracle hair growth cures that work"  |
|
|
|
