What a huge waste of public money

[Impasse]

Just use an apostrophe to demonstrate possession when the noun ends with an "s".

No need to start adding anything extra or even trying to pronounce the superfluous letter when speaking. So in this case: Dickens'.

Carry on.

[turbobloke]

La Liga said:

turbobloke said:

La Liga said:

How can the 'fundamental tenant of English justice' be reversed without a change in the law the guidelines are discussing?

In the light of the questionable guidance, via judicial activism.

Surely you've heard of it? Just in case given the apparently nonplussed state of the above post:

Judicial activism is when judges substitute their own political opinions for the applicable law, or when judges act like a legislature (legislating from the bench) rather than like a traditional court.

So a judge is going to just decide...

Yes, possibly so. The term judicial activism isn't a fictional concept so yes, the nature of judicial activism where it occurs is that 'a judge is just going to decide' to substitute their own opinion and legislate from the bench, it's in the definition above. You asked how law can be changed (in effect) and I gave you an example from the real world. It looks as though it didn't go down too well.

[amusingduck]

Moonhawk said:

The only way to prove absolutely would be to record the whole intimate act and therefore demonstrate the woman actively participated throughout.......is that really the road we are going down?

Is it active participation if they just lie there?

[Johnnytheboy]

I wonder what the jury - as reported - spent 90 minutes deliberating?

"If we sit here long enough, do you think we'll get offered another round of coffees?"

[Ultraviolet]

Looks like the prosecution manipulated the evidence...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12146...

[VolvoT5]

Ultraviolet said:

Looks like the prosecution manipulated the evidence...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12146...

So by playing the tape at 2 frames per second instead of the normal speed they made it look like he had twice as long to commit an offence. Wow...... quite scary to think the CPS are manipulating evidence to make people look guilty or otherwise.

This whole 'case' seems crazy. Really hope the woman in question is going to be charged with wasting police time or something. I mean I don't suppose this bloke is able to claim any compensation for the year of hell he has been through at the hands of this liar?

[andymadmak]

do we have any clues as to the identity of the accuser? (other than that she is 60+)

[Impasse]

So it seems that some posters on this thread were right. There really is more to this case than meets the eye.

But maybe something other than a potentially dodgy Not Guilty verdict and subsequent biased media reporting.

[bitchstewie]

If you play a video @ 2fps instead of 1fps aren't you speed it up rather than slowing it down?

[popeyewhite]

bhstewie said:

If you play a video @ 2fps instead of 1fps aren't you speed it up rather than slowing it down?

It's possible they meant 1 frame stretched to 2 seconds, rather than 2 frames squeezed into the same time as 1.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

La Liga said:

turbobloke said:

La Liga said:

How can the 'fundamental tenant of English justice' be reversed without a change in the law the guidelines are discussing?

In the light of the questionable guidance, via judicial activism.

Surely you've heard of it? Just in case given the apparently nonplussed state of the above post:

Judicial activism is when judges substitute their own political opinions for the applicable law, or when judges act like a legislature (legislating from the bench) rather than like a traditional court.

So a judge is going to just decide...

Yes, possibly so. The term judicial activism isn't a fictional concept so yes, the nature of judicial activism where it occurs is that 'a judge is just going to decide' to substitute their own opinion and legislate from the bench, it's in the definition above. You asked how law can be changed (in effect) and I gave you an example from the real world. It looks as though it didn't go down too well.

I asked how a 'fundamental tenet(!)' would be reversed. I didn't ask for alternative ways to describe how a judge can make incorrect points of law and open themselves up to an appeal.

The context suggested permanence as it was allegedly driven by a change in guidance that magically changed the law. See the quote once more:

williamp said:

Last month, Mrs Saunders issued new guidelines to police and prosecutors that men accused of rape would have to prove that their alleged victim had consented to sex. This is a reversal of the fundamental tenet of English justice that people are innocent until proven guilty. Even though that remains the case in court, the guidelines will inevitably mean that more men are charged with rape – but will do nothing to improve conviction rates. It is making a statement rather than upholding the rule of law.

It's obvious this wouldn't be a 'one off' decision by one judge, to achieve, would it?

Therefore it was appropriate to extrapolate your suggestion to see what would be required to achieve the permanent change. Having done that, your suggestion didn't hold up too well, did it?

[PurpleMoonlight]

bhstewie said:

If you play a video @ 2fps instead of 1fps aren't you speed it up rather than slowing it down?

I was think that too.

But whichever way, the CPS did not present it as evidence for the prosecution. Why not? Obviously because it was not beneficial to their case. So their case appears to centre totally on the alleged victims claim that she was assaulted even though the CCTV evidence clearly showed he claim was very very unlikely to be true.

The whole thing stinks.

[turbobloke]

La Liga said:

I asked how a 'fundamental tenet(!)' would be reversed.

And I responded, that response remains valid.

In any case, what's fundamental and a tenet? Not that it matters. Anything could be reversed. The nature of judicial activism includes legislating from the bench, note, legislating; you still haven't read that definition!

Examples from UK and USA can be found at the links below, whether the past is fundamental or tenet-y enough for your personal perspective doesn't change the fact that the future may hold an example that is. Also, other people don't have your perspective but still live in the real world somehow

http://www.newlawjournal.co.uk/nlj/content/judicia...

http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/rule-of-law/ju...

[anonymous-user]

Yes, you're right. It's theoretically possible that every judge in the UK will all change something major about the law at once off their own backs. A realistic prospect that certainly answered my question as to how misinterpreted guidance would suddenly change the law as it stands.

This is a risk that can seemingly occur in every discussion had around criminal law.

"The death penalty has been abolished".

"Ahhh well has it? Have you not heard of Judicial activism?"

"A person cannot be convicted upon an admission alone."

"Ahhh well has it? Have you not heard of Judicial activism?"

[turbobloke]

La Liga said:

Yes, you're right. It's theoretically possible that every judge in the UK...

We need to stop there

Every judge? No, that's not what I said.

It needs only one activist judge, and it's not a theoretical matter.

Case closed m'lud.

[amusingduck]

PurpleMoonlight said:

bhstewie said:

If you play a video @ 2fps instead of 1fps aren't you speed it up rather than slowing it down?

I was think that too.

Probably not, depending on what the source video was recorded in.

If the CCTV was recorded at 4fps, and played at 2, you're effectively playing at half speed.

TV/DVD is typically 25/30fps IIRC.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

La Liga said:

Yes, you're right. It's theoretically possible that every judge in the UK...

We need to stop there

Every judge? No, that's not what I said.

It needs only one activist judge, and it's not a theoretical matter.

Case closed m'lud.

I know you didn't say every judge, but that'd what it'd need to make a fundamental change as described. A one off decision which would practically be seen as an incorrect application of a point of law which could be appealed. You'd then need the appeal judge/s to also ignore the law etc etc. Not really a probable or realistic answer as to how incorrectly interpreted guidance would change the law. But yes, pointless going in a circle.

Back to the topic, I'd really like to the see the prosecution file. Especially the form that CPS complete and send back to the police with the justification for charging.

VolvoT5 said:

So by playing the tape at 2 frames per second instead of the normal speed they made it look like he had twice as long to commit an offence. Wow...... quite scary to think the CPS are manipulating evidence to make people look guilty or otherwise.

As others have pointed out. This would increase the speed. The recorder is capturing one frame per second. If you play it back at two FPS you're displaying two seconds of recorded data per one second of playback time.

amusingduck said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

bhstewie said:

If you play a video @ 2fps instead of 1fps aren't you speed it up rather than slowing it down?

I was think that too.

Probably not, depending on what the source video was recorded in.

If the CCTV was recorded at 4fps, and played at 2, you're effectively playing at half speed.

TV/DVD is typically 25/30fps IIRC.

It was recorded at one FPS.

[turbobloke]

Hardly worth re-answering a question I already answered very clearly particularly as there's nothing substantive that could render the answer deficient. Reply again, have the last word, and the thread can move on hopefuly.

[Timbergiant]

Took all of about 3 minutes to fins out who the lying "victim" is, Paul Elam knows.

[WinstonWolf]

Timbergiant said:

Took all of about 3 minutes to fins out who the lying "victim" is, Paul Elam knows.

It's a fairly short leap to find out who she is from there...