£80000 for civil rape conviction
Discussion
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Derek Smith said:
What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?
Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
+1Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
Bill said:
MB140 said:
She took him home, she followed him out the club he was ejected from. He wasn’t found guilty in a criminal court.
Re-read it. He followed her home and forced his way in while she stalled for time, then raped her.If she can’t remember getting home who’s to say they didn’t get in a taxi and he accompanied her home together. Like many a pissed man/woman will do on a night out.
He may well have followed her but again where’s the evidence. She can’t remember.
Look I will say this, if he did rape her then he deserves a lot more than just a fine but yet again we are hearing about two people intoxicated to the point of memory loss and the woman accusing the man of rape. What’s to say she didn’t rape him then.
It just stinks to me that this woman seems to be ruining his life on what at best can be described as very very shaky evidence. The word of someone so pissed they can’t remember stuff. This is life changing for him.
Derek Smith said:
What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?
Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
So being acquitted isn't cleared? Nobody prosecuted can ever be 'cleared' by that argument.Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
MB140 said:
It just stinks to me that this woman seems to be ruining his life on what at best can be described as very very shaky evidence. The word of someone so pissed they can’t remember stuff. This is life changing for him.
It's life changing for her too... It is his word against hers. It wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt, but the civil court felt she was more believable than him.Bill said:
MB140 said:
It just stinks to me that this woman seems to be ruining his life on what at best can be described as very very shaky evidence. The word of someone so pissed they can’t remember stuff. This is life changing for him.
It's life changing for her too... It is his word against hers. It wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt, but the civil court felt she was more believable than him.My other main concern is the vindictive people about to come out with false accusations and if there more believeable a quick £xxxxxx payout in civil court.
Seems dodgy to me getting paid by a civil court for something already found not guilty in a criminal court.
Fair does if he is convicted in a criminal court and then the victim wants financial compensation from the civil court. No problems with that. But to lose in a criminal court then have a second bite at civil court seems wrong.
I was burgled a quite a few years ago, scrote that did it was found not guilty (he did it known local thief selling stolen goods from my house caught red handed in effect). Does that mean I can now sue him for compensation in the local civil court. If that’s the case the civil courts would be full of people suing people with no evidence.
PorkInsider said:
MB140 said:
Seems dodgy to me getting paid by a civil court for something already found not guilty in a criminal court.
He wasn’t found ‘not guilty’.Guilt is binary. You are either guilty or not guilty. Not proven is a load of b
ks. Proven = Guilty
Not proven = Not guilty
Arrrrrrh
Dr Jekyll said:
Derek Smith said:
What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?
Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
So being acquitted isn't cleared? Nobody prosecuted can ever be 'cleared' by that argument.Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
A criminal court case is a test of evidence, not of guilt. It is not an enquiry; it is a fight between two sides. It's the best we can do, but it has faults.
In certain cases, someone found not guilty in a trial can be retried. There's a high profile case coming up later this year where the accused was found not guilty some year ago.
MB140 said:
Yes I agree if it happened as she described its life changing for her too.
My other main concern is the vindictive people about to come out with false accusations and if there more believeable a quick £xxxxxx payout in civil court.
Seems dodgy to me getting paid by a civil court for something already found not guilty in a criminal court.
Fair does if he is convicted in a criminal court and then the victim wants financial compensation from the civil court. No problems with that. But to lose in a criminal court then have a second bite at civil court seems wrong.
I was burgled a quite a few years ago, scrote that did it was found not guilty (he did it known local thief selling stolen goods from my house caught red handed in effect). Does that mean I can now sue him for compensation in the local civil court. If that’s the case the civil courts would be full of people suing people with no evidence.
Do you not see the irony? Your burglar was found 'not guilty' but you know "He did it". My other main concern is the vindictive people about to come out with false accusations and if there more believeable a quick £xxxxxx payout in civil court.
Seems dodgy to me getting paid by a civil court for something already found not guilty in a criminal court.
Fair does if he is convicted in a criminal court and then the victim wants financial compensation from the civil court. No problems with that. But to lose in a criminal court then have a second bite at civil court seems wrong.
I was burgled a quite a few years ago, scrote that did it was found not guilty (he did it known local thief selling stolen goods from my house caught red handed in effect). Does that mean I can now sue him for compensation in the local civil court. If that’s the case the civil courts would be full of people suing people with no evidence.
If it's binary why are you defaming this guy you accuse of burgling your house by insisting he did it?
Edited by Oakey on Saturday 6th October 09:32
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Derek Smith said:
What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?
Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
+1Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
singlecoil said:
Thing is, these days it's become a case of "she says he did it = he did it".
Pretty scary stuff.
I don't think it does. There's also a lot ofPretty scary stuff.
"Well, she was obviously gagging for it"
"She should be grateful any man would"
"Look at the way she was dressed"
"What kind of woman goes to a man's hotel room after 7pm if she wasn't willing"
Man ridiculing victim of sexual abuse on world stage asks ‘why didn’t she come forward sooner?’
Derek Smith said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Derek Smith said:
What's the problem? She made a claim for damages and won. Isn't that what the civil courts are for?
Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
So being acquitted isn't cleared? Nobody prosecuted can ever be 'cleared' by that argument.Why do you hope he wins, especially when he wasn't cleared of rape as you suggest.? The criminal court found the case 'not proved'.
Good on her. She's got nothing out of this evidently, other than a sense of justice.
A criminal court case is a test of evidence, not of guilt. It is not an enquiry; it is a fight between two sides. It's the best we can do, but it has faults.
In certain cases, someone found not guilty in a trial can be retried. There's a high profile case coming up later this year where the accused was found not guilty some year ago.
Your last sentence confirms my point, nobody can ever be cleared once prosecuted.
Countdown said:
singlecoil said:
Thing is, these days it's become a case of "she says he did it = he did it".
Pretty scary stuff.
I don't think it does. There's also a lot ofPretty scary stuff.
"Well, she was obviously gagging for it"
"She should be grateful any man would"
"Look at the way she was dressed"
"What kind of woman goes to a man's hotel room after 7pm if she wasn't willing"
Man ridiculing victim of sexual abuse on world stage asks ‘why didn’t she come forward sooner?’
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff