Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: "Nick" at the CPS
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
MWTW |
'Nick' accused Savile and who waves the banner of bring Savile to book ? Well no book really but as you say JK how many other fantasists decided there was a nice crock of gold over the rainbow track suit? |
|
JK2006 |
Of course the problem is - if someone is dead it is hard to construct a case against their false accusers. Likewise, if the offending is so stupid and extreme (as Beale) as to make prosecution easy. That's why the CPS man says false allegations are "rare". Yes those made so stupidly as Beale's - very few people are as stupid as her. Let's be clear - the vast majority of false allegations do not succeed - and most police will not assist or encourage an obvious false accuser. But the minority that end in trial and conviction is nevertheless in thousands. Some convicted will be fair and true (to an extent at least). I repeat my Freedom of Information figures - between 2014 and 2017 Surrey Police alone had 4,820 allegations of sex abuse. That is one tiny force. In 2015, of the 1670 claims to Surrey Police, only 242 were referred to the CPS. But 242 a year means around 800 over three years (don't have recent acquittals or convictions yet). Multiply that by around 50 forces - that's 40,000 innocent (until proven guilty) trials and God knows how many wrongful convictions. It could be you. |
|
JK2006 |
Interesting that he also accused Savile. If he is prosecuted and convicted - how many other of Savile's false accusers will face trial and return of the millions paid to them?
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4860826...-fantasist-Nick.html |
|
JK2006 |
Problem is - if they prosecute, the spotlight may fall on police who encouraged and assisted him; likewise the media (Exaro). As in the Jemma Beale case - surely, now, police AND CPS, who encouraged and assisted her crimes against innocent men must be prosecuted. Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice; Malfeasance in Public Office.
I feel sorry for the loonies who falsely accuse. Even those who do it deliberately (one of my accusers from 17 years ago - found to have told the truth by a jury, although he didn't - admits having made £80,000 from his claims; mainly from media and compensation; that is some incentive to lie or exaggerate, particularly when being encouraged by officials). Until the law is changed and proof is needed, not just one person's word, this explosion of false allegations will continue.
Yes - the lack of protection of anonymity will help (we'll all soon be told who "Nick" is, if he's prosecuted and convicted) but the problem is far more complex than that.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4860826...-fantasist-Nick.html |
|
|
|
