And not ALL pleas of Guilty mean guilt.

'He added the prosecution accepted four not guilty pleas, including one rape charge, accepting the alternative charge of indecent assault on the same victim.'

Rape is by far the most serious charge,and can be up to a life sentence.Indecent assault can often be around 3/4 years.
Guilty of course,but from my own experience in court they now have him on a far lesser charge...to those of us well versed in these matters it shows far more here than a simple guilty plea....were his accusers telling porkys for extra compensation as mine did?

Innocent Accused wrote:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086950...gling-sister-11.html

and his case is the norm , not the exception.

Outrageous..cameras should be on the whole time an accused is in the police station. Its' the only protection they have.

And will these cops be prosecuted for child abuse ?..not on your life.

Police behaviour, behaviour of lawyers, judge behaviour, jury behaviour - all more sloppy, lazy, corrupt or wrong than efficient and decent.

veritas wrote:
Innocent Accused wrote:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086950...gling-sister-11.html

and his case is the norm , not the exception.

Outrageous..cameras should be on the whole time an accused is in the police station. Its' the only protection they have.

And will these cops be prosecuted for child abuse ?..not on your life.

I was illegally detained in a police station in solitary confinement with a light on,so the cameras could see me...no cameras while being interrogated though....odd?

I have allways thought that the audio recordings the police make when interviewing someone is a highly suspect practise as with a bit of jiggery pokery they could make you say absolutely anything on the recording

Evo wrote:
I have allways thought that the audio recordings the police make when interviewing someone is a highly suspect practise as with a bit of jiggery pokery they could make you say absolutely anything on the recording

It's the bits before and after where the damage can be done.Also remember America is a little different to us.

JK2006 wrote:
And not ALL pleas of Guilty mean guilt.

When I posted I expected this response ... and also expected it from JK !

He's absolutely right, of course.

The legal terminology used in sexual offences has been perverted and manipulated so much that it's impossible from the reports to determine how harshly we should be judging him (assuming he is really guilty of the offences).

For example, 'making indecent images of children' can refer to either idly clicking upon a youtube video thumbnail of a 17 year old girl dancing sexily that might appear next to the video you've been watching of an adult woman dancing. Or else it could mean that he was actually taking nude pictures of toddlers.

It also states that the child porn images were 'levels 1 - 4' with level 5 being most serious. Well a picture of a 20 year old woman having sex in a school uniform is classified as level 4 child porn. Naked pictures of toddlers posed in sexual positions are merely level 1.

Similarly, 'indecent assault' could mean that he groped a few 15 year old teenagers with their 'consent', and only now have they decided that they were abused. 'Rape of a child' is a blanket term that covers the actual rape of babies to 12 year old girls having willing sex with anyone over 16.

Of course, this lack of clarity doesn't prevent the neanderthals underneath the article calling for him to be disembowelled by his fellow inmates - in other words, incitement to murder.

I don't blame the jury all the time they are not given the full truth.