Another prove your innocence case
Discussion
Burwood said:
Surprise surprise, obtuse remarks by those in the police force and legal profession. Never at fault. s
t just happens.
If you take your blinkers off you will see that people are saying the exact opposite, but, hey, rants are more fun.t just happens.Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 16th December 16:02
Burwood said:
Surprise surprise, obtuse remarks by those in the police force and legal profession. Never at fault. st just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.
Apart from all of those who haven't. t just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.The 'surprise, surprise', is more 'someone doesn't read properly and posts rubbish generalisation'.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Not from my perspective.
Not sure how youd work this out - Police analysts have been unable to put a figure on it. Recording is streets ahead of how it used to be however without a crystal ball its impossible to tell what would and wouldnt have been reported.Edited by Bigends on Saturday 16th December 16:28
La Liga said:
Burwood said:
Surprise surprise, obtuse remarks by those in the police force and legal profession. Never at fault. st just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.
Apart from all of those who haven't. t just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.The 'surprise, surprise', is more 'someone doesn't read properly and posts rubbish generalisation'.
Burwood said:
La Liga said:
Burwood said:
Surprise surprise, obtuse remarks by those in the police force and legal profession. Never at fault. st just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.
Apart from all of those who haven't. t just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.The 'surprise, surprise', is more 'someone doesn't read properly and posts rubbish generalisation'.
La Liga said:
Gameface said:
If that's the case, doesn't that lay the blame for this fiasco more squarely at the door of the police?
Yes, the person in charge of disclosure should have judged the material to be relevant as per the definition on the previous page. They should also be investigated to see if their actions amount to misconduct / gross misconduct.La Liga said:
There's no excuse in this case as it seems rather obvious and the disclosure officer had clearly seen the material to comment on it, but it's important to consider the wider points.
La Liga said:
Regardless of that, from what we know it seems obvious to me it should have been disclosed, so I stand by what I said earlier with regards to seeing if the officer has a case to answer for misconduct.
Breadvan72 said:
gooner1 said:
Elroy Blue said:
Anybody who thinks disclosure is 'a few hours looking at records' clearly had absolutely no idea what they're talking about
Maybe, but isn't 'a few hours' exactly all the new Prosecution Barrister needed?Breadvan72 said:
Those wicked feminists are everywhere! If only women would know their place, we would not have these difficulties, eh? Police officers, prosecutors and Judges say that the system is under funded, but you know better, based on your extensive experience of, er... the internet?
In this case, the adversarial system produced an acquittal of an innocent man. What would you prefer?
Yes, exactly as expected! Mockery, diversion and exaggeration! Makes my point all the more relevant. Thanks for that. You have absolutely no idea of my experience in anything, but I can recognise rudeness.In this case, the adversarial system produced an acquittal of an innocent man. What would you prefer?
Burwood said:
Surprise surprise, obtuse remarks by those in the police force and legal profession. Never at fault. st just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.
A rape case is always going to get funded overall to be taken to court - the issue is whether the people in the system are well trained and resourced.t just happens. Ironic that the first cry is 'poor funding', yet how much money was wasted on this case. It would seem at least hundreds of thousands.If a phone was examined the data should have been listed on the disclosure schedule - its a very basic mistake which is why it is surprising.
PurpleMoonlight said:
I get that every reported incident is recorded.
The recording does not evidence a similar increase of actual crimes being committed.
That's probably the best way of looking at that graphThe recording does not evidence a similar increase of actual crimes being committed.
However there may be a missing middle line showing the number placed before courts
Going back to this case - why do many people assume he was going to be found guilty without the disc?
What evidence supports that?
saaby93 said:
That's probably the best way of looking at that graph
However there may be a missing middle line showing the number placed before courts
Going back to this case - why do many people assume he was going to be found guilty without the disc?
What evidence supports that?
The chances of him being convicted were high enough that this went to court. If that wasn't the case it wouldn't have got this far.However there may be a missing middle line showing the number placed before courts
Going back to this case - why do many people assume he was going to be found guilty without the disc?
What evidence supports that?
It's a nightmare scenario if the accuser appears credible despite not telling the truth.
Without sight of Mr Heye's brief I don't see how anyone can answer that question.
With regard to the way that police deal with rape allegations I wouldn't want to go back to the days when the usual initial action was to try and talk the complainant out of it. There was a notorious documentary where Thames Valley officers were shown interviewing a complainant in a rape case which led, indirectly,
to the rules the police work to now.
It may not be perfect ( what is) but it's a hell of a lot better than it used to be.
My opinion: No-one in their right mind would want to be a detective with the current workload.
With regard to the way that police deal with rape allegations I wouldn't want to go back to the days when the usual initial action was to try and talk the complainant out of it. There was a notorious documentary where Thames Valley officers were shown interviewing a complainant in a rape case which led, indirectly,
to the rules the police work to now.
It may not be perfect ( what is) but it's a hell of a lot better than it used to be.
My opinion: No-one in their right mind would want to be a detective with the current workload.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff