Another prove your innocence case

[saaby93]

If we're going to refer to 'victims' before a case is proven we're probably best opening with both parties being victims the way the system is currently operating.

Dr Jekyll said:

saaby93 said:

The trouble with phone records is they can give a one sided picture. There may be other things done or said inbetween that can show things different to the records alone.
The defence shouldnt need anything to prove innocence
The prosecution case should be strong enough to convict on its own
If its not strong enough the case should fail.

It isn't as simple as that, the defence may need to put prosecution evidence into context. There was a recent case where after the alleged rape the defendant sent a text message to the complainant saying 'I'm sorry'. The defence were able to show that after the alleged offence but before the 'sorry' message the complainant sent a message to the defendant saying 'why are you ignoring me?' It's all very well saying the jury shouldn't have convicted without proof, but it's pretty likely they would draw an inference from the apparent apology.

It was either that case or a similar one that I was referring to.
If you only have the message 'sorry' on the phone and what led up to that message isnt on a phone, how can it be used?
Wherever that example, the history was found on the other person's phone (why not the originator's phone -was there deletion of messages or were they just not available)
TV detective plots have quite a bit of this only seeing half the story leading down the wrong path
Phone messages are being given too much prominence just because theyre records. The problem is theyre partial.

Edited by saaby93 on Thursday 25th July 07:56

[saaby93]

This one live again
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49112...
11 years on
How do you refute 'Prosecutor Jocelyn Ledward described the charge as "a simple allegation of a brief sexual touching over clothing".
or for that matter how do you make it stack up?

Edited by saaby93 on Thursday 25th July 13:03

[saaby93]

cookie118 said:

I disagree completely.

This is a perfect example of where we tend to treat victms of rape and sexual assault differently and often worse than victims of other crimes. If someone had their house broken into and things stolen I don't think that anyone would hesitate to say that they were a victim of a crime, or that it was prejudicing the trial/investigation to do so.

Analogies can be a nuisance sometimes
No it's not really like that

It's like someone claiming their house was broken into and things stolen and accusing someone of having done it.
It's then for the police etc to try to establish all three

In the footballer case some pages back it wasnt the plaintiff that made all the allegations
It was the prosecution that added that step

However if someone feels they've just had their crown jewels stolen, you can understand them wanting something done about it.

Edited by saaby93 on Thursday 25th July 21:27

[saaby93]

Bigends said:

he HMIC quote in relation to victims being believed relates to the recording of crimes by Police - not prosecutions. Victims alleging rape and other sexual offences werent being believed at that time and no crimes recorded. Many reports were later being incorrectly cancelled by Police.

Is the whole recording system flawed?
If they dont go so far as being proven as a crime shouldn't they be recorded as 'alleged crimes' ?

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 27th July 20:36

[saaby93]

Burwood said:

JagLover said:

Burwood said:

JagLover said:

Sounds a strange case

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49165106

Mental health issues? Attention seeking? Either way it's nothing new, blaming a dozen people excepted.

Given the targets you could also add a possible political motivation. Anyhow, seems strange and I wonder if more details will emerge.

I hadn't thought of that. Despicable act and glad the accused are apparently taking legal action.

Depends what happened
If she hadnt changed her mind, the 12 of them might still be trying to prove their innocence - who do you believe.
Whatever it was still might have happened, but she could have changed her mind because it was less hassle
In which case she's the one now trying to prove innocence?

[saaby93]

Taxi driver victim saved by tracker device - 3 years sentence
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-4...
Assuming no tracker device was available to prove your innocence, would the evidence have been enough to convict?

[saaby93]

rover 623gsi said:

There were 1,925 convictions in 2018-19 - a 27% drop from the previous year. This was in spite of allegations of rape reaching a high of 58,000 in England and Wales.

Given what women have to endure when reporting a rape and what they have to through in a trial I find it hard to believe that 58,000 of them would make it up. I consider it far more likely that guilty men are getting off scot free.

That's always been the case though for all crimes
The justice system is setup so that in grey cases it's better that the guilty go free than the innocent are locked up.
Can't lock people up just because the stats don't look right - have to be certain of guilt.
The other way is to take the courts out of it and use some sort of reconciliation type procedures instead
Do the stats show percentage of allegations involving strangers to those known to the complainant?

[saaby93]

rover 623gsi said:

saaby93 said:

Do the stats show percentage of allegations involving strangers to those known to the complainant?

I don't know.

And what difference does that make?

The previous line about adopting reconciliation procedures rather than courts
It may not work too well with strangers

[saaby93]

how did this come to court
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-50398851

[saaby93]

rover 623gsi said:

saaby93 said:

how did this come to court
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-50398851

Because a woman died in unusual circumstances???

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/nov/11/ow...

....
The owner of a chip shop in a Welsh village murdered his wife by throwing a deep fat fryer containing scalding oil over her, a jury has been told.
Geoffrey Bran, 71, allegedly attacked his wife, Mavis Bran, 69, at their business the Chipoteria in Hermon, Carmarthenshire.
She rang a friend and screamed: “Please help me, please. Emergency, emergency, please get here. Geoff has thrown boiling oil over me. Please get here, I need you now. Help.”

She suffered burns to 46% of her body and died six days later, the jury at Swansea crown court heard.

...

Thanks - so theyre testing whether that message is true
How can they tell one way or the other?

[saaby93]

Randy Winkman said:

saaby93 said:

how did this come to court
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-50398851

How did this story get in this thread?

this thread is about how do you prove your innocence once an allegation is made against you.
What do you need?
It may have got bogged down in a certain type of case

[saaby93]

amusingduck said:

Jesus Christ, the contrast between those two BBC chip shop articles is insane.

One makes him sound like a poor bugger with an abusive alcoholic wife who suffered a terrible accident and made everyone think he did it

The other makes him sound like evil personified, to say the least. An abusive wifebeating monster who decided to kill her in am unimaginably torturous death, and then calmly served customers whilst she lay cooking in the back.

If the latter, no punishment will be severe enough IMO...

whoever tells the best narrative wins?

[saaby93]

Cold said:

Chip shop owner, Geoffrey Bran has been cleared of the murder and manslaughter charges.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-50474374

'Mr Bran, who was cleared by a jury following five hours of deliberations, was in tears as the not guilty verdicts were read out at Swansea Crown Court.'

[saaby93]

Mojooo said:

Venturist said:

Cold said:

An accusation does not mean guilt.

Absolutely, and I hope that justice has been done, given none of us besides the accused and the deceased can ever know the truth.
I meant that it would be good to hear whether it was a definitive result, and if so why; or if it was not guilty by default.

If it went to the jury then i dont believe you ever find out because they are not supposed to disclose their deliberations

Of course justice has been done.
The whole point of our justice system is that only if someone is found guilty are they locked up.
If there's any doubt they're presumed innocent and carry on with their lives.
Otherwise we could all end up with a rack of accusations against us.

[saaby93]

Guy saved from prosecution due to lucky availability of CCTV?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptons...

[saaby93]

Keoparakolo said:

What?

There was no trial for the alleged rape, she made the story up and was prosecuted for it. However, now that she’s been found guilty all of a sudden everyone on here is supporting her. Seems like double standards to me on here around this.

from above it's not that clear
maybe she consented to some , not to others
maybe she included some in the complaint that shouldn't have been
Courts may not be the best way of resolving these issues

[saaby93]

Does this one belong here
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-51...

[saaby93]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

saaby93 said:

Does this one belong here
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-51...

Are you suggesting she is innocent?

She accused the lad.........

[saaby93]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

saaby93 said:

She accused the lad.........

She lied.

How do you prove it one way or the other?
Why woudnt you believe her over him?

[saaby93]

Hey
In this age band there'll be willing parties either way.
The question here is that once the girl had accused the lad, how did he manage to prove the other way?