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.
Topic History of: We've been through this before Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author
Message
md
JK2006 wrote: Yes the problem in the past has been; police and CPS are loathe to prosecute perjurers because in court police themselves would be indicted for assisting them with details - also, to be fair, it might stop genuine victims coming forward if they fear problems in acquittals.
I thought the fear genuine victims have in coming forward is fear of not being believed, not fear of problems in acquittals. Fear of not being treated with respect, not being taken seriously or of police officers casting suspicion if subsequent investigations fail to uncover any corroborative evidence seems to me an entirely different matter to fear of acquittal. Isn't this almost the same as saying that victims will not come forward unless a conviction can be guaranteed? Don't acquittals and convictions belong to trials and law courts and in the interests of ensuring fair trials, need to be viewed separately to how allegations are handled by police officers?
JK2006
Yes the problem in the past has been; police and CPS are loathe to prosecute perjurers because in court police themselves would be indicted for assisting them with details - also, to be fair, it might stop genuine victims coming forward if they fear problems in acquittals.
As everything a catch-all law or procedure won't work; specific cases must be brought - Danny Day, for example, seems like a cast iron case. But "Nick" could plead insanity and it might well be appropriate.
The crucial one, I think, is malfeasance in public office where both police and CPS can be prosecuted for conspiring to pervert the course of justice deliberately.
I think the Mark Pearson case (Victoria Station "digital penetration") would be perfect to test that.
tdf
"We've been through this before"
I agree - we have.
Justice for real abuse victims. Jail for false accusers.
For those who haven't seen it before, a link to Harvey Proctor's remarkable, and brave press conference of August 2015:
pete
This appalling story has been posted independently here by three contributors – hedda, JK and most recently MWTW.
I very much agree with hedda’s point about the use of wealth and power to manipulate (and therefore morally vitiate) justice, and I hope JK is right that the climate is changing in media-land about the reporting of these legal atrocities.
One further point occurs to me. When the CPS allows itself to be driven by top-down victim-fem narratives of a pervasive (entirely hallucinated) “rape culture” rather than by a ground-up evaluation of all the available evidence (or lack of it), when it becomes a proselytiser for a pernicious, misanthropic ideology of victimhood, justice and truth will be destroyed.
I notice that the two principal drivers of the unspeakable injustice inflicted on this man were former Scotland Yard deputy assistant commissioner Sue Akers, who exerted unwarranted pressure on her former Met colleagues (presumably to “believe the accuser – sorry- victim”), and Alison Levitt, the former head of the CPS itself. Both overruled the work of investigating cops, which had suggested that the evidence was flimsy, in order to pursue what I take to be a “rape culture/guilty-unless-proven innocent” agenda.
It could simply have been the allure of money, of course, but I find myself wondering whether these two privileged and powerful individuals are supporters of the sour-faced sisterhood which has infiltrated the police, the CPS and the judiciary more broadly.
The misandrist militants of the victim-idolising sisterhood simply know they are right. Contrary evidence which undermines the victim narrative is regarded by them as nothing more than instances of patriarchal oppression. With these dangerous zealots in power, justice is imperilled and may not survive.
My rather feeble conclusion is this: we must learn to laugh at them, publicly. They are uniformly bitter, angry and humourless (not to mention unimaginative and not very bright). When Samuel Butler wrote Hudibras in the seventeenth century, the joyless Puritans who had presided over a reign of relentlessly grim rule under Cromwell’s Protectorate, discovered to their dismay that the people found their dreary coercive pieties ridiculous and laughable. They never really recovered.
While I agree that cops and prosecutors who embrace this dangerous narrative-over-evidence malignancy should end up behind bars whenever they have falsely destroyed an innocent person’s reputation, I think we also need another Hudibras for our new Puritan Protectorate: intersectionalist PC victim feminists.
JK’s “Vile Pervert” is, I believe, a good start. Laughing at these scoundrels and their cruel pieties is the necessary first step to overturning the coup d’état they have surreptitiously been engaged in for at least three decades.
JK2006
but at last the media has cottoned onto the broken state of our judicial system; we've said for ages Police should be punished for allowing innocent victims of the False Allegations Industry suffer and die - David Bryant (and Lynn), Geoff Long, Ched Evans, Cliff, Gambo etc etc - and the CPS must insist that police provide them with all evidence on both sides of sex allegations because, if they don't and continue to prosecute only on the "can we get a conviction?" philosophy (whether or not it is a miscarriage of justice), they will see Individual Accountability kick in.
Forums 