Family & Relationships4 mins ago
Another Name Sullied But No Charges ....
33 Answers
http://
No charges but I await those that will claim no smoke without fire.
Isn't it about time this came to an end?
For the money spent Yew tree(Perhaps should have been operation Eucalyptus tree in the case of Mr Harris) is an unmitigated disaster; the money would have been much better spent chasing prolific pedophiles whom we are told Plod dont have enough resources to catch.
No charges but I await those that will claim no smoke without fire.
Isn't it about time this came to an end?
For the money spent Yew tree(Perhaps should have been operation Eucalyptus tree in the case of Mr Harris) is an unmitigated disaster; the money would have been much better spent chasing prolific pedophiles whom we are told Plod dont have enough resources to catch.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. 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.
The news about more cases of paedophilia this week should make it obvious that Operation Yew Tree should continue, and carry on until its task is complete. In what way are all those convictions a disaster ?
Are you saying that Britain would be a better place if Hall, Clifford, Denning and others had never been tried and convicted ? Perhaps you would be better pleased if the truth had not emerged about Savile in the first place.
Extraordinary !
Are you saying that Britain would be a better place if Hall, Clifford, Denning and others had never been tried and convicted ? Perhaps you would be better pleased if the truth had not emerged about Savile in the first place.
Extraordinary !
Perhaps I might but then again, there were no current cases so they would appear to be 'reformed' characters. This means this huge expense is for societies revenge, which I dont really have a problem with.
The point I am making is that this massive amount of money for relatively few convictions could be used to help put away current offenders who are currently abusing.
I also have a problem with this name and shame, even when no charges are bought. It is almost like they are looking to see if some member of the public will come forward rather than having something concrete to charge them on before arrest and publication of their name.
The point I am making is that this massive amount of money for relatively few convictions could be used to help put away current offenders who are currently abusing.
I also have a problem with this name and shame, even when no charges are bought. It is almost like they are looking to see if some member of the public will come forward rather than having something concrete to charge them on before arrest and publication of their name.
I have banged on about this ad infinitum, but am happy to do so once again.
The CPS brings a case if it believes it has a reasonable chance of conviction.
If the evidence which is revealed - and that can only be revealed after investigations as a result of a charge being raised - results in a decision that a conviction is unliekly, then the case is dropped.
It's a pure Catch 22 situation - you can't get the evidence for a court case until you bring a charge, you don;t know if the charge will stand up until you examine the evidence that the charge has revealed.
So the notion that the CPS chuck charges about in the hope that the odd one will stick, or that the person whose charges are dropped is completely innocent of anything, are eronious.
The CPS will inly invest public money in a trial if it believes there is a better than average chance of a conviction - in other words, being able to prove what they know beyond a reasonable doubt.
If that beief is not there, the charges are dropped, but that simply means that the CPS knew enough to raise a charge, but they don;t have evidence enough to be sure of proving it in court.
Knowing something and proving something are different - and that is the cornerstone of British justice.
It does not mean that Mr Gambaccini is innocent - merely that insufficient evidence (and that's not the same as no evidene) exists to pursue a trial in a reasonable hope of a convction.
The CPS brings a case if it believes it has a reasonable chance of conviction.
If the evidence which is revealed - and that can only be revealed after investigations as a result of a charge being raised - results in a decision that a conviction is unliekly, then the case is dropped.
It's a pure Catch 22 situation - you can't get the evidence for a court case until you bring a charge, you don;t know if the charge will stand up until you examine the evidence that the charge has revealed.
So the notion that the CPS chuck charges about in the hope that the odd one will stick, or that the person whose charges are dropped is completely innocent of anything, are eronious.
The CPS will inly invest public money in a trial if it believes there is a better than average chance of a conviction - in other words, being able to prove what they know beyond a reasonable doubt.
If that beief is not there, the charges are dropped, but that simply means that the CPS knew enough to raise a charge, but they don;t have evidence enough to be sure of proving it in court.
Knowing something and proving something are different - and that is the cornerstone of British justice.
It does not mean that Mr Gambaccini is innocent - merely that insufficient evidence (and that's not the same as no evidene) exists to pursue a trial in a reasonable hope of a convction.
YMB...I too have had my doubts about the naming and shaming in the past but have come to the conclusion that more victims are likely forward, if they think that there is a better chance of being believed. In the past, these people have been ridiculed for speaking out, thus making sure that they are victims for a second time.
For instance, more men have come forward to say that they were raped by Cyril Smith, now that the Danczuk's book has been published and its all out in the open. Some of these men have never spoken out before, not even to their own families. But there are many in Rochdale that still deny that he was a monster and paedophile, so there is still work to be done.
For instance, more men have come forward to say that they were raped by Cyril Smith, now that the Danczuk's book has been published and its all out in the open. Some of these men have never spoken out before, not even to their own families. But there are many in Rochdale that still deny that he was a monster and paedophile, so there is still work to be done.
Zeuhl....Can I implore you to get Simon Danczuks book from the Library
.....Smile for the Camera...The Secret Life of Cyril Smith.
In it, you will learn that the Police did exactly as you suggested at 16:48 today, but nothing happened. Nothing happened because MI5 stepped in and broke the investigating team up, and stole all the case work papers, which have never been seen again. The major reason why this happened was because Smith was involved in the organised grooming and trafficking
of young boys from all over the country, and if he had been exposed, then an awful lot of well-known members of the Establishment would have been dragged down with him and some of those are still alive today. Google "Elm Guest House"
In the case of Savile, he was investigated on numerous occasions, by his friends in the Police, but mysteriously nothing was forthcoming.
We have seen how the Establishment looks after itself but the heel-dragging that has gone all summer over the current Child Abuse Enquiry.
So lets get this out in the open and no more shady deals can be done. Publish and be damned.
.....Smile for the Camera...The Secret Life of Cyril Smith.
In it, you will learn that the Police did exactly as you suggested at 16:48 today, but nothing happened. Nothing happened because MI5 stepped in and broke the investigating team up, and stole all the case work papers, which have never been seen again. The major reason why this happened was because Smith was involved in the organised grooming and trafficking
of young boys from all over the country, and if he had been exposed, then an awful lot of well-known members of the Establishment would have been dragged down with him and some of those are still alive today. Google "Elm Guest House"
In the case of Savile, he was investigated on numerous occasions, by his friends in the Police, but mysteriously nothing was forthcoming.
We have seen how the Establishment looks after itself but the heel-dragging that has gone all summer over the current Child Abuse Enquiry.
So lets get this out in the open and no more shady deals can be done. Publish and be damned.
Good on you Z ! I got mine on from the Library on a Friday and returned it on Monday. Its written in a very easy style and isn't heavy at all. But it will make your hair stand on end. If the child abuse wasn't bad enough, wait until you get to the bit about asbestos.
Smith was a deeply corrupt and dangerous monster, and if he were still alive today, I would say it to his face.
Smith was a deeply corrupt and dangerous monster, and if he were still alive today, I would say it to his face.
It's good to know it's just not famous people that are getting arrested years after the events. This chap is 95 and some of the offences are 60 years old
http://
http://
I am surprised at the amount of people who are ignorant of the way the law works and yet have firm opinions on it.
To arrest a suspect is not a statement of their guilt; it means that any and all investigations into alleged offences have to be carried out in a 'lawful' manner; that all interviews with them, or about them, have to be recorded and transcribed; that property searches have to be properly overseen.......it is as much for their own protection as it is for the convenience of the Police.
The Police have made their investigations and have found no evidence with which to charge Gambaccini........it doesn't mean that it was a waste of time to carry out the investigations.
To arrest a suspect is not a statement of their guilt; it means that any and all investigations into alleged offences have to be carried out in a 'lawful' manner; that all interviews with them, or about them, have to be recorded and transcribed; that property searches have to be properly overseen.......it is as much for their own protection as it is for the convenience of the Police.
The Police have made their investigations and have found no evidence with which to charge Gambaccini........it doesn't mean that it was a waste of time to carry out the investigations.
/The Police have made their investigations and have found no evidence with which to charge Gambaccini........it doesn't mean that it was a waste of time to carry out the investigations. /
No
but it does mean that Gambaccini has been harmed by that process despite there being no case brought against him
No
but it does mean that Gambaccini has been harmed by that process despite there being no case brought against him
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles21 mins ago
ChatterBank57 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles98 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles119 mins ago
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.