I find it quite disturbing that the poor demented lady who believed herself raped and threw herself off a Manchester roof is constantly called a "rape victim" in the media. The man was acquitted. She was NOT raped.

She certainly believed she had been raped. Whether this was a mistake, a misunderstanding, a delusion, a miscarriage of justice or the effects of drink, drugs or rejection, we shall never know. But a jury found the accused INNOCENT.

The "ordeal" she went through in the witness box may have been many things but it is wrong, in law, to declare her a rape victim. I believe many rape victims were also deluded, mistaken or wrong but they were, at least, found, in law, to be victims. She (and many others) were NOT.

We're in a pretty sick state in this world, as far as JUSTICE is concerned. Let's not make it even worse by deliberately reporting it incorrectly.

JK.
here among the MWT Tweets, read the reply, she was a victim even though he was aquitted.

mobile.twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/430727807485083648

Soon you will be tried and trued again until proven guilty, ring any bells ?

Believe it or not....you will be believed,even if a jury do not.

Yes MWT is, like his close friend Max Clifford, very much in the "you will be believed" team.

Max will be hoping he is believed next month too.

It seems that..
Every time a jury convicts a sex offender it is "justice"

Every time a jury clears someone accused of a sex offence they "got off" and it is a miscarriage of justice.

It is peculiar how people have either absolute faith or contempt for the exact same system, depending on the result!

Honey.
The reason is all alleged Sex Offenders are guilty and even worse in a court of law an alleged Sex Offender is always guilty until proven innocent, unfortunately no one belives it.
Its going to be interesting times in the next couple of days I suspect the two big celeb trials get Not Guiltys lets see what the likes of MWT have to say, I can tell you, a quote similar to "dissapointed"

If either Roache or DLT is acquitted it gives out a loud message - that media publicity about celebrities provokes false allegations. From there it's only a small step to "You will NOT be believed... if you lie or exaggerate".

It's taken 14 years and we're not there yet.

JK2006 wrote:
I find it quite disturbing that the poor demented lady who believed herself raped and threw herself off a Manchester roof is constantly called a "rape victim" in the media. The man was acquitted. She was NOT raped.

She certainly believed she had been raped. Whether this was a mistake, a misunderstanding, a delusion, a miscarriage of justice or the effects of drink, drugs or rejection, we shall never know. But a jury found the accused INNOCENT.

The "ordeal" she went through in the witness box may have been many things but it is wrong, in law, to declare her a rape victim. I believe many rape victims were also deluded, mistaken or wrong but they were, at least, found, in law, to be victims. She (and many others) were NOT.

We're in a pretty sick state in this world, as far as JUSTICE is concerned. Let's not make it even worse by deliberately reporting it incorrectly.

Does anyone actually know the REAL reason this woman committed suicide or what was REALLY going through her mind at the time? You can never really know what is going through someones mind for sure, but did she give any clue?

Was it the 'rape' that made her suicidal or was it the not being 'believed' (whether the actual rape took place or not).

It's also worth acknowledging that many falsely (and genuinely for that matter) accused people often either feel suicidal and some have actually taken their own lives too. I don’t think anything is as black and white as people like Mark Williams Thomas would like to paint it, and you can't just go declaring everybody accused of rape (because unfortunately the reality is that many people do make false accusations, which shouldn't be a reflection on genuine complainants) guilty just incase the accuser tops themselves - as it could infact just as easily turn out the other way about and a wrongly convicted guy ends up topping himself and it sends out the wrong message to potential liars...

MWTWATCHER wrote:
Honey.
The reason is all alleged Sex Offenders are guilty and even worse in a court of law an alleged Sex Offender is always guilty until proven innocent, unfortunately no one belives it.
Its going to be interesting times in the next couple of days I suspect the two big celeb trials get Not Guiltys lets see what the likes of MWT have to say, I can tell you, a quote similar to "dissapointed"


I have a horrible feeling that in the Roache trial they will give a guilty verdict to the charge that was "witnessed" in the back of a rolls on a main road with traffic going past.

For some reason people seem determined to look for evidence to justify the decision they have already made, and the relentless paedo-hysteria in the media ensures that the jury already assume guilt before they start.

I do hope I'm wrong.

But Honey, it does not appear there were any actual witnesses to it - only the "victim's" word that people saw it. Why has nobody come forward? If I'd been on a bus and seen something like that going on in a Rolls, I'd remember it forever (and would have told others about it).

JK2006 wrote:
But Honey, it does not appear there were any actual witnesses to it - only the "victim's" word that people saw it. Why has nobody come forward? If I'd been on a bus and seen something like that going on in a Rolls, I'd remember it forever (and would have told others about it).


I know. It does seem ridiculous that nobody would notice "Ken Barlow" waving his bits around in public but people believe what they want to believe and there was someone in the back seat (doing nothing to help her friend)

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bill-roach...-corrie-star-3042388

Hooray! Cleared of everything. I hope this means the tide is turning.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
But Honey, it does not appear there were any actual witnesses to it - only the "victim's" word that people saw it. Why has nobody come forward? If I'd been on a bus and seen something like that going on in a Rolls, I'd remember it forever (and would have told others about it).


I know. It does seem ridiculous that nobody would notice "Ken Barlow" waving his bits around in public but people believe what they want to believe

wrong, honey!

The Jury system works !
The Jury clearly did NOT believe the words of people who waited 30, 40, 50 years to make a complaint.

The "abuse" here is that an 81 year old - with an unblemished record - can be subjected to such a horrific public assault based on the claims of hidden anonymous people (who are keeping their motives quiet)

The DLT case will collapse almost immediately ... and they may as well not bother with Rolf Harris !

In The Know (as always) wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
But Honey, it does not appear there were any actual witnesses to it - only the "victim's" word that people saw it. Why has nobody come forward? If I'd been on a bus and seen something like that going on in a Rolls, I'd remember it forever (and would have told others about it).


I know. It does seem ridiculous that nobody would notice "Ken Barlow" waving his bits around in public but people believe what they want to believe

wrong, honey!

The Jury system works !
The Jury clearly did NOT believe the words of people who waited 30, 40, 50 years to make a complaint.

The "abuse" here is that an 81 year old - with an unblemished record - can be subjected to such a horrific public assault based on the claims of hidden anonymous people (who are keeping their motives quiet)

The DLT case will collapse almost immediately ... and they may as well not bother with Rolf Harris !

I am delighted to be proved wrong.

I am pleased that the judge in his summing up said..

"The reality in the case is that either Mr Roache is lying or the complainants are"

because it leaves no doubt that the accusers were malicious or warped rather than mistaken. (although a quick glance at other forums tells us that many think he did it but "got off" )

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

because it leaves no doubt that the accusers were malicious or warped rather than mistaken. (although a quick glance at other forums tells us that many think he did it but "got off" )

Will always be the case, honey! ...... Which is why it is vital that accused keep anonymity UNTIL they have been proved guilty.

"beyond reasonable doubt"? I would suggest there is clearly a lot of doubt when it's one word against another - esp when the accusers cannot reasonably explain why they delayed complaining (and one accuser couldn't even remember when she had been raped) !!!!!!!