One of the things I’ve discovered from a member of the judiciary since my aborted debacle is a trick both police and witnesses use if it appears a trial is not going their way.

Encouraged by lawyers involved in the case, if it looks like their incompetence, corruption or, worst of all, criminal behaviour is liable to be exposed to the court and the judge, they find a helpful doctor or medical expert and are declared ill. Not just sick but seriously disabled. Cancer or heart problems or a stroke - anything which enables them to be so unwell as to have to withdraw from giving evidence and, more crucially, getting cross examined.

This kind of sworn appearance could either damage all hopes of convicting an innocent person or get the witness, cop or other person to face a trial themselves, for perjury or attempting to pervert the course of justice.

Especially as these days Judges are getting wiser and better at spotting lies or flaws in evidence.

I hasten to add that this is a general observation; not aimed at any specific person. I would hate to accuse anyone of so serious an offence. But I’m reliably informed that this has become a frequent ploy for dodgy characters who anticipate problems if their behaviour is too closely examined.

So - a word to others who may face false allegations, or any other prosecution based on a desire to convict someone of a crime, whether intentionally intended or done with the best of motives but flawed methods.

Especially if the person, suddenly declared too ill to appear or be questioned for any length of time, recovers miraculously within weeks of the trial collapsing, being abandoned or failing, and returns to work, fit, healthy and happy, beaming with the joys of life, quite possibly suntanned and slightly overweight.

JK2006 wrote:
I hasten to add that this is a general observation; not aimed at any specific person. I would hate to accuse anyone of so serious an offence.

Don't you sometimes say that police and prosecutors should face individual, personal accountability?

I think naming and shaming, and publicly criticising people involved in these nasty show trials is fair comment.

Officials involved in your latest prosecution, and the outrageous treatment of Liam Allen, Mark Pearson, Alexander Economou and many others should have the whistle blown on their antics.

Yes Randall I do think, in many cases, deliberate attempts to pervert the course of justice must be prosecuted. Prosecutors and police will always claim "best intentions" - "Credible and True" and other comments. But we are very close to a point where some police (and even their senior bosses - the top cop in my case was made aware of serious breaches by his officers that emerged more fully during the "debacle" - and did nothing) are going to jail. I think the Duckenfield prosecution is unfair and wrong but if he was to blame and deserved to suffer a trial, these recent police deserve justice FAR more.

Achieving prosecutions and convictions shouldn't be the goal, in my view. They'll be reported hardly at all, and dismissed as one rogue bad apple (after another...).

I think publicity should be the aim. Let's take a leaf out of the #metoo book. They weren't getting what they wanted from conventional procedures, so they invented another strategy.

There's a strong public interest in exposing the identities and activities of Mark Pearson's and Liam Allen's false accusers. Likewise with the two men who accused Simon Warr, and officials involved in bringing fraudulent prosecutions - like yours, Rolf Harris's, Dave Lee Travis - to court.

The biggest problem is most of your general public reader of things wants to believe the credible and true story over the incredibly made up lies and then when the person is found to of fabricated the whole story the public cannot take it, no smoke and all that.
Poor old Harvey Proctor is still thought of as a perverted MP, Rolf still has all his convictions intact in their eyes and there is we always knew Cliff Richard was a ...
Now going back to false accusers look at The Nick Trial, he is now in the standard going on about his father abusing him, did he ? Who knows, the boy who cried wolf of credible and true. Just because he has been found out as a Fantasist no more makes it likely that the story of his father is true or not. I doubt many false accusers corrupt cps, coppers and Ex coppers will end up in prison anytime soon.

Yes - the other side is still a good story but a LESS good story, trumped (I use that word wisely) by the more extreme, gory, gruesome fantasies. Which is why I think we DO need prosecutions and prison sentences; not being vindictive but it's a better story and will get far more coverage.