Another prove your innocence case
Discussion
Solocle said:
All I can say is:
this is a f
ing disgrace and a perversion of key judicial principles in this country.
What recourse do you have? Maybe you could sue the accuser for damages. Lost job? Lost oppurtunities? Emotional distress? Maybe not ambulance chasers, but courtroom chasers?
You could loose your job due to the stress, burden of it. You'll sure as fthis is a f
ing disgrace and a perversion of key judicial principles in this country.What recourse do you have? Maybe you could sue the accuser for damages. Lost job? Lost oppurtunities? Emotional distress? Maybe not ambulance chasers, but courtroom chasers?
k loose it when they show up at your work to arrest you. Unless the accuser has money, forget about it.
Civil courts, you can't get money of someone who has nothing and if you do it'll be a tenner a week.
Just hope karma is real I guess.
4x4Tyke said:
andy_s said:
cookie118 said:
Alternatively the person who made the complaint could be walking around scared because the person who raped them was found not guilty and they are scared they could encounter them again.
Not guilty does not mean the act never happened, or that it happened the way the defendant said it did, or that the accusation was false. It means there was not enough evidence to convict beyond all reasonable doubt and that covers a wide range of possible events from it happening exactly the way the defendant said it did-to exactly the way the accuser said it did-and everything in between!
Yes, but in law....Not guilty does not mean the act never happened, or that it happened the way the defendant said it did, or that the accusation was false. It means there was not enough evidence to convict beyond all reasonable doubt and that covers a wide range of possible events from it happening exactly the way the defendant said it did-to exactly the way the accuser said it did-and everything in between!
The burden of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt is for a prison sentence, depriving the suspect of their freedom. When it comes to other questions/situations such as a getting jobs, votes or my custom, there is not need for that level of proof.
1) There is a ex-councillor in Hull, he's faced charges of child abuse three times, one dropped because his supporters harassment of the victim into suicide, two trials in separate cities, evidence of the previous allegations was suppressed and he was found not guilty, not innocent, not guilty. This same councillor is the one that ordered the destruction of the police intelligence on Ian Huntley previous grooming young girls.
2) In another case I'm familiar with; the suspect strangles his cousin to death during a bondage sex session, admitted it, claimed it was an accident, went to sleep with the body; his defence lawyer kept calling the victim 'only a brass', Hull slang for a prostitute but offered no evidence of such. Not that it should have made the slighted difference to the question at hand. After the trial, a history of past sexual violence was revealed that was withheld from the jury.
We need to start trusting the juries with all the evidence, both ways and stop pussy footing around with rapists and child molestors, just as much as those proven to be making up false allegations.
In law, he is innocent if he's not guilty, that's all I meant, even the court said "We have been shown reports which emphasise the importance of not excluding the convicted from consideration for employment, but they say nothing about the acquitted, who surely deserve greater protection from unfair stigmatisation."There may be something else behind the case as 'the CC who had decided to include the information about the acquittal on the criminal check form was justified in doing so', but I don't understand why you would be on a Criminal Record Check list when you are not, technically, a criminal, as you have, in law, not committed a crime. If there is something else beyond what is presented to the jury, why can this not be a matter of public record for the accused to challenge it on - surely another tenant of law is the right to face your accuser, or less dramatically, to see and be able to challenge the substantive reasons why you are now ineligible for employment after being found innocent.
In that vein I wholeheartedly agree with your last point, with the caveat that currently, as you know, prejudicing a trial is contempt for good reason - so it's a fine line...
cookie118 said:
Alternatively the person who made the complaint could be walking around scared because the person who raped them was found not guilty and they are scared they could encounter them again.
Not guilty does not mean the act never happened, or that it happened the way the defendant said it did, or that the accusation was false. It means there was not enough evidence to convict beyond all reasonable doubt and that covers a wide range of possible events from it happening exactly the way the defendant said it did-to exactly the way the accuser said it did-and everything in between!
This is what this thread s aboutNot guilty does not mean the act never happened, or that it happened the way the defendant said it did, or that the accusation was false. It means there was not enough evidence to convict beyond all reasonable doubt and that covers a wide range of possible events from it happening exactly the way the defendant said it did-to exactly the way the accuser said it did-and everything in between!
if youre not found guilty youre presumed innocent. Otherwise anyone could make allegations about you and by the end of your life you could have a whole string.
Too many times in the past people have been locked up just because of the thinking ' it must be him wot done it' when he didnt
Our justice system is such that if the evidence doesnt stack up it doesnt stack up
This guy should have a clean slate
The judge is asking parliament to change the law to make it so
spaximus said:
There have been too many vexatious claims from women, who maintain anonymity where it has been proved, equally beyond doubt, that the offence was fabricated, yet the stigma for the man is there for life yet for the woman there is no come back in the majority of cases.
The law needs altering to reflect this somehow
Can you prove that there have been too many vexatious claims? All the evidence I have seen indicates that the false reporting rate for rape is the same as it is for other crimes.The law needs altering to reflect this somehow
In addition-if it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt that someone lied about a rape claim-that means they are tried for it and they lose their anonymity-unless I’m getting that wrong?
cookie118 said:
If it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt that someone lied about a rape claim-that means they are tried for it and they lose their anonymity-unless I’m getting that wrong?
That's the issue most people have. It's not always happening, while the blokes name is out there from day one. The man's identity should be witheld too IMO. Incredibly discriminatory that it's not.Certain quarters argue that any prosecution of women in these cases, even if they have lied from the word go, will deter genuine rape victims from coming forward.
Which I happen to think is b
ks. If it's genuine you'll have nothing to worry about. More prosecutions might deter the disgusting fantasists out for revenge though. cookie118 said:
spaximus said:
There have been too many vexatious claims from women, who maintain anonymity where it has been proved, equally beyond doubt, that the offence was fabricated, yet the stigma for the man is there for life yet for the woman there is no come back in the majority of cases.
The law needs altering to reflect this somehow
Can you prove that there have been too many vexatious claims? All the evidence I have seen indicates that the false reporting rate for rape is the same as it is for other crimes.The law needs altering to reflect this somehow
In addition-if it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt that someone lied about a rape claim-that means they are tried for it and they lose their anonymity-unless I’m getting that wrong?
Would people be happy if it was a brother of yours treated in such a case being deprived of jobs as a result? If a man is found not guilty they should not be any record made available in the way this man's was. We either believe in the jury system or we do not.
spaximus said:
You only have to look at recent cases to see that is correct. I have no time for anyone who rapes, equally I have no time for women who have "one night stand regret" then ruin a persons life. They can go to court be found not guilty of the charges and still have their lives ruined by the trial and the subsequent press it attracts, yet the accuser walks away with her identity a secret.
Cases have collapsed recently because of disclosur failings, but none of the claims were proven to be false, unless someone has been charged since?As above-all the data indicates that the false reporting rate for rape is not any higher than it is for other crimes.
cookie118 said:
spaximus said:
You only have to look at recent cases to see that is correct. I have no time for anyone who rapes, equally I have no time for women who have "one night stand regret" then ruin a persons life. They can go to court be found not guilty of the charges and still have their lives ruined by the trial and the subsequent press it attracts, yet the accuser walks away with her identity a secret.
Cases have collapsed recently because of disclosur failings, but none of the claims were proven to be false, unless someone has been charged since?As above-all the data indicates that the false reporting rate for rape is not any higher than it is for other crimes.
He spent £100k on legal costs, she received £22k from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority and applied for more.
This doesn't mean false reporting is higher, but that a false claim by a serial fantasist can ruin you, even if you are innocent and the claimant is making it up.
cookie118 said:
spaximus said:
You only have to look at recent cases to see that is correct. I have no time for anyone who rapes, equally I have no time for women who have "one night stand regret" then ruin a persons life. They can go to court be found not guilty of the charges and still have their lives ruined by the trial and the subsequent press it attracts, yet the accuser walks away with her identity a secret.
Cases have collapsed recently because of disclosur failings, but none of the claims were proven to be false, unless someone has been charged since?As above-all the data indicates that the false reporting rate for rape is not any higher than it is for other crimes.
Do you not think the police, cps would thibk twice before perusing these fake ones given the current climate on the situation and after years of "not believing".
The truth is no one knows the true figure as a lot of it goes unreported, no further. Just like rape.
moanthebairns said:
Do you have figures to back that up. What other crimes are you referring to.
Do you not think the police, cps would thibk twice before perusing these fake ones given the current climate on the situation and after years of "not believing".
The truth is no one knows the true figure as a lot of it goes unreported, no further. Just like rape.
Don't think there's much doubt that police and CPS would not think twice about taking action against failed allegations. I'm sure they wouldn't dream of it. The hue and cry from the feminists would be deafening.Do you not think the police, cps would thibk twice before perusing these fake ones given the current climate on the situation and after years of "not believing".
The truth is no one knows the true figure as a lot of it goes unreported, no further. Just like rape.
cookie118 said:
spaximus said:
You only have to look at recent cases to see that is correct. I have no time for anyone who rapes, equally I have no time for women who have "one night stand regret" then ruin a persons life. They can go to court be found not guilty of the charges and still have their lives ruined by the trial and the subsequent press it attracts, yet the accuser walks away with her identity a secret.
Cases have collapsed recently because of disclosur failings, but none of the claims were proven to be false, unless someone has been charged since?As above-all the data indicates that the false reporting rate for rape is not any higher than it is for other crimes.
And yet his name is made public, the accuser is given anonymity and the original start to this was a man found not guilty is still being treated as if he was actually guilty when applying for jobs.
In what world can that be right? You appear to be saying that because statistically there are no more false claims than other crimes, there isn't a problem.
As far as I can see if you are acquitted of most other crimes there is no record passed on to anyone, with rape it appears otherwise.
moanthebairns said:
Do you have figures to back that up. What other crimes are you referring to.
Do you not think the police, cps would thibk twice before perusing these fake ones given the current climate on the situation and after years of "not believing".
The truth is no one knows the true figure as a lot of it goes unreported, no further. Just like rape.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/legal_guidance/perverting-course-of-justice-march-2013.pdfDo you not think the police, cps would thibk twice before perusing these fake ones given the current climate on the situation and after years of "not believing".
The truth is no one knows the true figure as a lot of it goes unreported, no further. Just like rape.
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-co...
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jo_Lovett/pub...
/238713283_Home_Office_Research_Study_293_A_gap_or_a_chasm_Attrition_in_reported_rape_cases/links/00b7d52a09b4935e0e000000/Home-Office-Research-Study-293-A-gap-or-a-chasm-Attrition-in-reported-rape-cases.pdf?origin=publication_detail
spaximus said:
But is that not the problem. A man accused of rape has evidence withheld that would prove he was innocent of the accusation or that in other peoples eyes, they hadn't enough to get him for the crime they thought he had done had they given all evidence to his defence team.
And yet his name is made public, the accuser is given anonymity and the original start to this was a man found not guilty is still being treated as if he was actually guilty when applying for jobs.
In what world can that be right? You appear to be saying that because statistically there are no more false claims than other crimes, there isn't a problem.
As far as I can see if you are acquitted of most other crimes there is no record passed on to anyone, with rape it appears otherwise.
You are very clearly saying in the previous quote that these were false reports, but the simple fact is that they were not proven so. The disclosure failings were serious breaches, however I found the reaction to them from the press outlandish compared to the issue of rape in our society, and there were serious issues with cases other than rape cases, but the focus was only on rape cases.And yet his name is made public, the accuser is given anonymity and the original start to this was a man found not guilty is still being treated as if he was actually guilty when applying for jobs.
In what world can that be right? You appear to be saying that because statistically there are no more false claims than other crimes, there isn't a problem.
As far as I can see if you are acquitted of most other crimes there is no record passed on to anyone, with rape it appears otherwise.
Are you generally worried about false accusations of crimes, or only rape cases?
There's this myth/perception that a not gulty/no trial verdict means it is a false report, but that is absolutely not true. It is a not guilty verdict on the defendant, but it carries no verdict for the person who made the report.
You are very clearly saying in the previous quote that these were false reports, but the simple fact is that they were not proven so. The disclosure failings were serious breaches, however I found the reaction to them from the press outlandish compared to the issue of rape in our society, and there were serious issues with cases other than rape cases, but the focus was only on rape cases.
Are you generally worried about false accusations of crimes, or only rape cases?
There's this myth/perception that a not gulty/no trial verdict means it is a false report, but that is absolutely not true. It is a not guilty verdict on the defendant, but it carries no verdict for the person who made the report.
[/quote]
I am simply saying that a person who is found not guilty should be treated as innocent of the crime and not then stopped from working because his acquittal is not enough for some.
Rape, as I have said, is abhorrent but being accused of something a person did not do is equally abhorrent for that person. I do not subscribe to the current feeling and one you seem to support, that just because he was found not guilty is not good enough. How does an innocent person prove it any other way to satisfy other people who were not there. And how does an innocent person move on?
This thread was about rape, hence my comments, yes other false accusations are made but carry none of the stigma that rape does for a man.
Justice is not perfect and some of the recent cases, the footballer, the two Irish Ru
cookie118 said:
moanthebairns said:
Do you have figures to back that up. What other crimes are you referring to.
Do you not think the police, cps would thibk twice before perusing these fake ones given the current climate on the situation and after years of "not believing".
The truth is no one knows the true figure as a lot of it goes unreported, no further. Just like rape.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/legal_guidance/perverting-course-of-justice-march-2013.pdfDo you not think the police, cps would thibk twice before perusing these fake ones given the current climate on the situation and after years of "not believing".
The truth is no one knows the true figure as a lot of it goes unreported, no further. Just like rape.
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-co...
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jo_Lovett/pub...
/238713283_Home_Office_Research_Study_293_A_gap_or_a_chasm_Attrition_in_reported_rape_cases/links/00b7d52a09b4935e0e000000/Home-Office-Research-Study-293-A-gap-or-a-chasm-Attrition-in-reported-rape-cases.pdf?origin=publication_detail
spaximus said:
But is that not the problem. A man accused of rape has evidence withheld that would prove he was innocent of the accusation or that in other peoples eyes, they hadn't enough to get him for the crime they thought he had done had they given all evidence to his defence team.
And yet his name is made public, the accuser is given anonymity and the original start to this was a man found not guilty is still being treated as if he was actually guilty when applying for jobs.
In what world can that be right? You appear to be saying that because statistically there are no more false claims than other crimes, there isn't a problem.
As far as I can see if you are acquitted of most other crimes there is no record passed on to anyone, with rape it appears otherwise.
You are very clearly saying in the previous quote that these were false reports, but the simple fact is that they were not proven so. The disclosure failings were serious breaches, however I found the reaction to them from the press outlandish compared to the issue of rape in our society, and there were serious issues with cases other than rape cases, but the focus was only on rape cases.And yet his name is made public, the accuser is given anonymity and the original start to this was a man found not guilty is still being treated as if he was actually guilty when applying for jobs.
In what world can that be right? You appear to be saying that because statistically there are no more false claims than other crimes, there isn't a problem.
As far as I can see if you are acquitted of most other crimes there is no record passed on to anyone, with rape it appears otherwise.
Are you generally worried about false accusations of crimes, or only rape cases?
There's this myth/perception that a not gulty/no trial verdict means it is a false report, but that is absolutely not true. It is a not guilty verdict on the defendant, but it carries no verdict for the person who made the report.
Given the importance of the category of false reports to police and public perceptions, it is rather surprising
that there is very limited research on this issue, and virtually no recent work that contains data for the
UK.
From your link cookie, so basically you don't know the true number.
Interesting one - civil case
Guy doesnt turn up in court to defend, so it seems presumed guilty?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-cen...
What else could they do if a defendant doesnt turn up?
Guy doesnt turn up in court to defend, so it seems presumed guilty?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-cen...
What else could they do if a defendant doesnt turn up?
saaby93 said:
Interesting one - civil case
Guy doesnt turn up in court to defend, so it seems presumed guilty?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-cen...
What else could they do if a defendant doesnt turn up?
it's a very interesting one and I must admit I don't understand that he's been found not guilty in a criminal case but then can still be sued in a civil caseGuy doesnt turn up in court to defend, so it seems presumed guilty?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-cen...
What else could they do if a defendant doesnt turn up?
cookie118 said:
There's this myth/perception that a not gulty/no trial verdict means it is a false report, but that is absolutely not true. It is a not guilty verdict on the defendant, but it carries no verdict for the person who made the report.
I'd say that the "they were found not guilty......but there is no smoke without fire" perception is far more prevalent. Indeed such a view is even enshrined into our legislation (e.g. past accusations showing on enhanced CRB checks - even if not guilty).irocfan said:
it's a very interesting one and I must admit I don't understand that he's been found not guilty in a criminal case but then can still be sued in a civil case
Civil cases have a lower burden of proof. That's why you often find civil cases being brought even after a criminal case has returned a not guilty verdict.
Moonhawk said:
cookie118 said:
There's this myth/perception that a not gulty/no trial verdict means it is a false report, but that is absolutely not true. It is a not guilty verdict on the defendant, but it carries no verdict for the person who made the report.
I'd say that the "they were found not guilty......but there is no smoke without fire" perception is far more prevalent. Indeed such a view is even enshrined into our legislation (e.g. past accusations showing on enhanced CRB checks - even if not guilty).It makes a mockery of walking free and having a clean slate otherwise.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff