Hairy Cornflake (DLT) NOT GUILTY

[kev1974]

He must have really annoyed someone "important"?

Can't help thinking there are much more up to date cases that would be better use of the CPS time, effort, and money.

[carinaman]

kev1974 said:

He must have really annoyed someone "important"?

Can't help thinking there are much more up to date cases that would be better use of the CPS time, effort, and money.

like:

David Leigh and Nick Davies The Guardian website 11 July 2011 said:

Evidence of illegal data checks on Gordon Brown buried by 2005 ruling Judge ruled that proposed trial based on key discoveries by Plymouth police would be a waste of taxpayers' money

from: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/jul/11/ev...

It mentions another two Labour MPs also being targetted including one that was supposedly on some hit list of Rebekah Brooks.

like:

Carl Eve Crime Reporter The Herald 14 September 2013 said:

"If it is deemed to be in the public interest to investigate these matters further should not the Home Office provide funds independently of Devon and Cornwall Police to enable this to take place effectively?"

Read more: http://legacy.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Judge-jailed-pa...

About this chap:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2419958/Po...

So there's no money in the bank if cases involve police criminality or ineptitude or the friends that are the Murdoch press, but money to have another go at DLT and give to the Ukraine?



So we didn't have the money for those two investigations above, but we spent how much on the elections for Police and Crime Commissioners again?

Edited by carinaman on Tuesday 25th February 04:00

[Bill]

I'm confused about what people want.

Should we ignore sexual abuse cases if the accused is famous? Or those that are old? The most recent of DLT's was 2008, no? Rape and sexual abuse is pretty hard to prove and the CPS regularly lose cases, so should they just give up altogether?

I mean wasn't this the problem with Saville. He was famous and believed to be a good bloke so cases were ignored.

[Scuffers]

To some extent, who the accused is should be irrelevant, that's the lesson from savil.

The problem now is the police and cps have opened the gates to a compensation fueled witch hunt.

What's needed is some level headed aprasial of the allegations before charges are made and any publicity.

What's clear from these cases us that they were kicked off under political pressure, never a good start.

[Steffan]

Scuffers said:

To some extent, who the accused is should be irrelevant, that's the lesson from savil.

The problem now is the police and cps have opened the gates to a compensation fueled witch hunt.

What's needed is some level headed aprasial of the allegations before charges are made and any publicity.

What's clear from these cases us that they were kicked off under political pressure, never a good start.

That is supposed to be the role of the CPS. Begs the question IMO.

[Bill]

It doesn't really answer my questions though. (And where are these compo claims...?)

The supposed victims either didn't go to the authorities or went but were fobbed off because of the alleged perp's celebrity so what should they do now the celeb aura has been broken? Just live with it? (bearing in mind the fame of the person they believe has done them wrong has meant they are regularly reminded if it.)

From what I understand of DLT's case it's relatively minor and IMO everyone involved would be better served by mediation - basically give him a chance to apologise and everyone moves on but both sides can insist on a court case. (I'm thinking out loud, so this is far from a flawless idea...)

But if the CPS have a case based on two people's word they can hardly ignore it.

[aw51 121565]

My theory is that people have approached/been referred to CICA after claiming to have been abused, and they have been paid their 30 pieces of silver (regardless of any action being taken against the alleged abuser).

The alleged victims are now being "called" on their claims of abuse, and because only a minority of them might have actually been abused the evidence is generally inconsistent and of very poor quality (leading to recent aquittals).

Compo will already have been paid (to at least some of the alleged victims, probably to a majority if not all of 'em ) by CICA, of this there is no doubt...

£3.5k rings a bell; I'm sure someone will tell me if I'm wrong .

[10 Pence Short]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Better not tell these folks,

"O. J. Simpson "

The OJ case is a good example of both a jury in a criminal trial delivering a perverse verdict and how it would be wrong to ask victims to rely on (and fund, at the risk of adverse costs against them) civil claims where the only likely 'justice' is a financial penalty against the perp.

If OJ had less than ha'penny to rub, do you think he'd have had to defend a civil trial? No, me neither.

[Bill]

aw51 121565 said:

My theory is that people have approached/been referred to CICA after claiming to have been abused, and they have been paid their 30 pieces of silver (regardless of any action being taken against the alleged abuser).

The alleged victims are now being "called" on their claims of abuse, and because only a minority of them might have actually been abused the evidence is generally inconsistent and of very poor quality (leading to recent aquittals).

Compo will already have been paid (to at least some of the alleged victims, probably to a majority if not all of 'em ) by CICA, of this there is no doubt...

£3.5k rings a bell; I'm sure someone will tell me if I'm wrong .

It seems unlikely: http://www.justice.gov.uk/victims-and-witnesses/ci...

[anonymous-user]

I have no clue whether or not the charges against DLT have any merit. I have no clue whether the decisions made by the prosecutors are good or bad. I have no clue whether the complainants have good motives or bad ones.

I have some reservations about the public interest element in the case because, even if some of the allegations are true, and even though gropeyness at the workplace was and is cheesy and wrong, the allegations did not go as far as rape or, unless I have missed something (quite possible, as I haven't followed the news reports closely) serious sexual assault.

I notice, however, that one of the outstanding charges relates to events alleged to have occurred in 2008. This is not yesterday, but it isn't 40 years ago either, so some of the points about ancient cases may not apply with such force as they do in relation to other charges.

[Chim]

Bill said:

aw51 121565 said:

My theory is that people have approached/been referred to CICA after claiming to have been abused, and they have been paid their 30 pieces of silver (regardless of any action being taken against the alleged abuser).

The alleged victims are now being "called" on their claims of abuse, and because only a minority of them might have actually been abused the evidence is generally inconsistent and of very poor quality (leading to recent aquittals).

Compo will already have been paid (to at least some of the alleged victims, probably to a majority if not all of 'em ) by CICA, of this there is no doubt...

£3.5k rings a bell; I'm sure someone will tell me if I'm wrong .

It seems unlikely: http://www.justice.gov.uk/victims-and-witnesses/ci...

Would disagree

[i] A payment to a victim of a sexual offence

If you have been the victim of a sexual offence, we can pay an award for this, too.
We understand that you may not wish to talk about what has happened to you but if you do need some assistance with your application, you can contact our helpline on 0300 003 3601.
You may also wish to contact Victim Support. They are a national charity that helps people affected by crime and has local branches throughout England, Scotland and Wales. They can give you free and confidential support to help you deal with what you have been through.
As with any other application we will need to establish if you qualify for an award (we call this eligibility). Again, our trained helpline staff will be able to help you with this.
If you look at page 67 (Tariff of injuries Part B) of The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 you may get an idea of the amounts we can award for sexual assault, and also of the terminology we use. [/i]

[Bill]

Ok, missed that.

[Murph7355]

I don't really understand how compo payments help in cases like this. Was listening to the radio the other day when a woman was noting it helps people draw a line under it.

So the alleged perp' is found not guilty, but receiving a few grand would make matters more bearable? Surely if justice is the consideration, only the former matters?

Doesn't sound right.

[Steffan]

Murph7355 said:

I don't really understand how compo payments help in cases like this. Was listening to the radio the other day when a woman was noting it helps people draw a line under it.

So the alleged perp' is found not guilty, but receiving a few grand would make matters more bearable? Surely if justice is the consideration, only the former matters?

Doesn't sound right.

No it does not. On the face of it apparently, compensation is payable irrespective of the outcome of the case. That sounds altogether wrong to my way of thinking and I would be interested to know whether this is the case and what sums are involved. It could explain the rash of prosecutions recently. Anyone an expert on this?

[Chim]

Steffan said:

Murph7355 said:

I don't really understand how compo payments help in cases like this. Was listening to the radio the other day when a woman was noting it helps people draw a line under it.

So the alleged perp' is found not guilty, but receiving a few grand would make matters more bearable? Surely if justice is the consideration, only the former matters?

Doesn't sound right.

No it does not. On the face of it apparently, compensation is payable irrespective of the outcome of the case. That sounds altogether wrong to my way of thinking and I would be interested to know whether this is the case and what sums are involved. It could explain the rash of prosecutions recently. Anyone an expert on this?

No expert but have done a little research, compensation is paid regardless of verdict, this is actually for good reason. If say you have been stabbed in a robbery, they catch someone but fail to convict, you have still been stabbed hence you will still receive the criminal injury payout. Same thing applies here, the Police and CPS have accepted that these people are victims and have brought a case against someone, ergo they are now due a payout. The amount varies depending on circumstances and nature of assault, goes as detailed as under clothing, over clothing, seeing a willy etc.

In addition you are also on the court bandwagon and can claim for all of this, days of work, travel, accommodation, meals etc etc. All while staying completely anonymous, before and after, in fact you don't even need to be in the court or see the jury.

You can begin to see why this would be attractive to certain members of our society, its amazing the lengths some people will go to for money, even a little. Just watch Mr Kyle.

[Steffan]

Chim said:

Steffan said:

Murph7355 said:

I don't really understand how compo payments help in cases like this. Was listening to the radio the other day when a woman was noting it helps people draw a line under it.

So the alleged perp' is found not guilty, but receiving a few grand would make matters more bearable? Surely if justice is the consideration, only the former matters?

Doesn't sound right.

No it does not. On the face of it apparently, compensation is payable irrespective of the outcome of the case. That sounds altogether wrong to my way of thinking and I would be interested to know whether this is the case and what sums are involved. It could explain the rash of prosecutions recently. Anyone an expert on this?

No expert but have done a little research, compensation is paid regardless of verdict, this is actually for good reason. If say you have been stabbed in a robbery, they catch someone but fail to convict, you have still been stabbed hence you will still receive the criminal injury payout. Same thing applies here, the Police and CPS have accepted that these people are victims and have brought a case against someone, ergo they are now due a payout. The amount varies depending on circumstances and nature of assault, goes as detailed as under clothing, over clothing, seeing a willy etc.

In addition you are also on the court bandwagon and can claim for all of this, days of work, travel, accommodation, meals etc etc. All while staying completely anonymous, before and after, in fact you don't even need to be in the court or see the jury.

You can begin to see why this would be attractive to certain members of our society, its amazing the lengths some people will go to for money, even a little. Just watch Mr Kyle.

Being of a slow brain I have much to learn and I thank you. That certainly makes the reasons for the sudden rash of trials much easier to understand and very questionable. In the cases of Roache, Le Veil and DLT al three have suffered huge costs in funding their defence, huge suffering personally, their families have been ravaged and their multiple accusers have all been entitled to rewards and anonymity. No downside on one side indeed pure gains. Massive downsides on the other irrespective of whether the verdict is guilty or innocent. That cannot be right! The compensation culture has found another easy picking!

[10 Pence Short]

The amounts of compensation available from CICA for these types of offence are small and victims will have to persuade CICA as to why it was not reported at the time. There is a time limit of two years, which requires special circumstances to overcome. They will also have to be relatively free themselves of criminal records.

Not to mention they will have to go through a trial and risk ridicule from those who know them if it all goes wrong.

For these reasons, I think it is unrealistic to suggest the allegations are driven by CICA money.

[Chim]

10 Pence Short said:

The amounts of compensation available from CICA for these types of offence are small and victims will have to persuade CICA as to why it was not reported at the time. There is a time limit of two years, which requires special circumstances to overcome. They will also have to be relatively free themselves of criminal records.

Not to mention they will have to go through a trial and risk ridicule from those who know them if it all goes wrong.

For these reasons, I think it is unrealistic to suggest the allegations are driven by CICA money.

Not so, limitation for brining a case of this type is 1967, in addition, if the CPS pursue the case it is automatically eligible for CICA money as I outlined in my last post. Fail to see where ridicule comes into it either as the "victim" is completely anonymous regardless of verdict

[10 Pence Short]

Chim said:

Not so, limitation for brining a case of this type is 1967, in addition, if the CPS pursue the case it is automatically eligible for CICA money as I outlined in my last post.

When I last looked (recently) claims had to be brought within 2 years, unless there are good reasons. Action by the CPS is not required, btw. In any case, the CICA claim value for a touch on the boob is small fry. I appreciate PH is a cynical place full of people all too willing to see the worst in people (yeah, yeah, I do it too), but in this case I believe the daschund has the wrong larch.

[10 Pence Short]

Just to add, the CICA tariff for a DLT style rub of the booby is about £1000.