Donate SIGN UP

Jim Davidson Bailed Again

Avatar Image
mikey4444 | 15:49 Wed 10th Jul 2013 | News
19 Answers
I don't want to interfere with due legal process but these investigations seem to be taking an awful lot of time :::::

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23254497
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
/Jim Davidson Bailed Again/

they should drop him and recall Nick Compton
Question Author
That was obtuse Zuehl...I had to google Nick Compton !
you think having Nick Compton round will save time?! He'd still be scratching around in 2018.
^ lol

sorry - it was the only 'recently dropped' player i could think of!

hey ho
Henri Brandman defending , eh? That's showbiz! He is a showbiz solicitor and his career is mostly arguing about contracts, but his crime practice started with page 3 girls and progressed from there. His advantage is that knows every editor and all the paparazzi, and can prevent their wilder moments. He won't be cheap. Not to be taken as proof of guilt that you hire him though, at great cost.

As to the case, Henri Brandman is happy with it, so that's good enough. Don't expect any salacious gossip in the tabloids about Mr Davidson; he'll stop that. I think it is a bit ridiculous to round up suspects , not have the evidence to charge them, and then bail them for weeks and weeks while you try to find it. Either you've got witness statement/s to charge or you haven't. But if no charge ensues , expect stories of my life of living hell when I was innocent, says Jim, to appear immediately (see H Brandman , above!)
The whole issue must be costing millions and the Met are behaving like clowns.

As already said, they claim to have evidence - so use it and act upon it. To merely call a person to court repeatedly and continue bailing them for three or more months gives the impression Plod is short of evidence.
.

I would have thought Mikey you WOULD wish to interfere with the legal process and get it to run at a decent speed for a change !

Justice delayed is justice denied
Would you like them to rush it and miss a vital piece of evidence which either proved him not guilty or guilty.
I'd prefer the police to get it right first time and not have to bother with interminable appeals.
Of course we want them to get it right - but some were arrested in December and still live under a shadow. The positive thing here is that 'victims' have already come forward and made their accusations. So what is holding up the police?
So am I correct in thinking that of enough 'victims' come forward that this is enough to prosecute even though there is no hard evidence or independent witnesses?
I was pretty shocked that all this hinges on accusation and confession (two parties needed) and not much else.

how ever that has been the case for sexual offences for close on twenty years - otherwise no one gets convicted because well you know - you usually do it in private.

St Fred can usefully intervene here

I worry because depressed old men confess to things they didnt do
[and I may be one, one day !]

but that is modern day Justice for you !
PP, the law demanded corroboration both of the evidence of children and of complainants in sexual cases. Corroboration had to be independent evidence of the crime. The jury had to be warned of the danger of convicting without it and judges would often stop cases when there was no corroboration and direct an acquittal. The result was offenders of the kind that these celebrities are alleged to be, were never arrested or charged and they could continue their activities without hindrance.

The rule for corroboration of children was abolished in 1988 and that for sexual offences in 1994.
sir.prize - he isn't being repeatedly called to court. This is pre-charge bail given at a police station by police officers. He hasn't been charged at all.
And they phone you and tell you a new bail date.
Just expressing my view. I very much doubt whether the named comedians, of which there are a few, are all guilty of sexual abuse as suggested. But this is just my gut feeling.

It is so much like a witch hunt. Of course I may be wrong, but Plod doesn't seem too eager to proceed. Wonder why that is.
Well it seems they have other cases to work on.
Question Author
The Police would have plenty of time available to them if they diverted the officers that are spying on the families of murder victims away onto other more important issues.
Could these charges relate to the television show, 'Big Break'? As I recall it was so dire as to be criminal.
Not that criminal, Sandy. He resisted the temptation to mention potting a black or kissing the brown. But he had his doubts. I met him in a clinic for alcoholics once , when he was still on TV, and he introduced himself by saying " I am Jim Davidson.....I am a comic" See? Even he thought I wouldn't know what he was supposed to be :)

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Jim Davidson Bailed Again

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.