Crosswords1 min ago
What Happened Next?
Last week the DM ran a story about a man walking through a tube station, being accused of sexually assaulting a woman also walking through. From CCTV, it was obvious no such thing happened, yet the man was charged by police. What happened next?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lynbrown. 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.
It beggars belief that this could even get a far as being charged let alone getting to court. The CPS must have seen the CCTV before they decided to proceed to court.How on Earth could they justify charging him? This undermines the entire area of 'celebrity sexual assault' cases.
Even now this totally innocent man has had over a year of the trauma of this case hanging over him. Even in such a clear case as this there will be those who maintain that 'there is no smoke without fire!'
I hope this man sues the actress for a £million or so, the woman should be named and shamed to make sure she never works again! Does anyone have an idea who it was ? I can only assume she did it for free publicity so give her some! ( no! I said give her 'some' not 'one')
Even now this totally innocent man has had over a year of the trauma of this case hanging over him. Even in such a clear case as this there will be those who maintain that 'there is no smoke without fire!'
I hope this man sues the actress for a £million or so, the woman should be named and shamed to make sure she never works again! Does anyone have an idea who it was ? I can only assume she did it for free publicity so give her some! ( no! I said give her 'some' not 'one')
I do not feel safe being a male, in a society where just walking straight past a female in a busy railway station is enough to be charged with sexual assault and taken to court , no matter that the case was dropped after just 90 minutes , the damage had been done !
I have said that I am against the alleged offender being granted anonymity in a sexual assault case but this has made me change my mind! In this case the alleged 'Victim'should be named and charged with wasting police time and with perjury.
I have said that I am against the alleged offender being granted anonymity in a sexual assault case but this has made me change my mind! In this case the alleged 'Victim'should be named and charged with wasting police time and with perjury.
Baldric ,we already know he was cleared. It is just unbelievable that the evidence ( or rather the lack of evidence) was enough to charge him and keep him waiting over a year for a 3 day trial only for the jury to clear him in just 90 minutes. It has cost tens of thousands of £s to pursue an innocent man.
// A CPS spokesman said: "There was sufficient evidence for this case to proceed to court and progress to trial. We respect the decision of the jury."//
even if you complain to the CPS about case selection - they say the sustem is meant to work like this
and for those posters who say there was no case to answer
wrong there was and it went to trial
he was acquitted on indictment
and someone else has said the case was dripped
no it went to trial and a jury verdict - not guilty
lucky acquitted man Mr Mark Pearson - is meant to go around saying O great isnt british justice great ?
clearly he has another idea ....
The case I was involved in as a defence witness - the jury took eight minutes to acquit and the judge just shrugged and said = OK lets do something else for the rest of the day .....
and here they took ninety .....
and the other thing is ( which was reflected in 'my' case )
why would a " victim" here 60 years of age state clearly she had been digitally penetrated by such and such passer by .... ?
was she making it up or
did she really believe she had been digitally penetrated by a stranger on waterloo concours ?
The harm that 'victims' do to the innocent really can live after them ....
even if you complain to the CPS about case selection - they say the sustem is meant to work like this
and for those posters who say there was no case to answer
wrong there was and it went to trial
he was acquitted on indictment
and someone else has said the case was dripped
no it went to trial and a jury verdict - not guilty
lucky acquitted man Mr Mark Pearson - is meant to go around saying O great isnt british justice great ?
clearly he has another idea ....
The case I was involved in as a defence witness - the jury took eight minutes to acquit and the judge just shrugged and said = OK lets do something else for the rest of the day .....
and here they took ninety .....
and the other thing is ( which was reflected in 'my' case )
why would a " victim" here 60 years of age state clearly she had been digitally penetrated by such and such passer by .... ?
was she making it up or
did she really believe she had been digitally penetrated by a stranger on waterloo concours ?
The harm that 'victims' do to the innocent really can live after them ....
well the question should be
what happened during the trial
http://
the CCTV served on the defence had been slowed down
I am certain uninntentionally
so they had to hire an expert to say it had been 'doctored'
costs are hardly ever awarded to the defence
so how much did this cost poor mr pearson ?
what happened during the trial
http://
the CCTV served on the defence had been slowed down
I am certain uninntentionally
so they had to hire an expert to say it had been 'doctored'
costs are hardly ever awarded to the defence
so how much did this cost poor mr pearson ?
^^ It just gets worse!
The CCTV was slowed down , to make it look as if the accused had more time to commit the offence, and the CPS were shown the true version but refused to withdraw the case ! The woman who made the allegation had not even seen the CCTV until shown it in court and then immediately said 'that can not be me in that CCTV ?
This story is worthy of a 'show trial' by a desperate dictator in a third world 'Police State', yet it is here in the UK where our 'Justice System' is supposed to be the envy of the world??
Many people in the situation this man found himself in, would just have been forced to plead guilty as they could not afford to defend themselves.
Who paid for the 'Expert witness' who proved that the CCTV had been 'doctored'? I certainly could not if it had been me in that situation.
The CCTV was slowed down , to make it look as if the accused had more time to commit the offence, and the CPS were shown the true version but refused to withdraw the case ! The woman who made the allegation had not even seen the CCTV until shown it in court and then immediately said 'that can not be me in that CCTV ?
This story is worthy of a 'show trial' by a desperate dictator in a third world 'Police State', yet it is here in the UK where our 'Justice System' is supposed to be the envy of the world??
Many people in the situation this man found himself in, would just have been forced to plead guilty as they could not afford to defend themselves.
Who paid for the 'Expert witness' who proved that the CCTV had been 'doctored'? I certainly could not if it had been me in that situation.
CCTV is time stamped Eddie
since I demanded CCTV frm network rail having been manhandled on the concourse ( they didnt give a toss of course )
and one should see the time stamp going slowly- but one had to look !
Bradley thingey - the fella who murdered and stuffed people down storm rrains in Oz - he is meant to have pointed to himself on viddie in court and exclaimed - that isnt me mate ! [ convicted]
however for THIS lady in court - perhaps she was preparing for the worst and saying - " that is not me - but I was there so you have got the wrong viddie !"
I think it is true to say that I have done more tribunal work than you and it is truly remarkable what ( lying ) witnesses will say to 'rectify' things
the defence have to pay for such and expert
and the lawyer will tell you if you dont pay for it you may go under
you will already have his fees as unrecoverable costs ....
and no I dont advise you to plead guilty to a sexual offence such as this on the grounds that you cant afford to defend ....
since I demanded CCTV frm network rail having been manhandled on the concourse ( they didnt give a toss of course )
and one should see the time stamp going slowly- but one had to look !
Bradley thingey - the fella who murdered and stuffed people down storm rrains in Oz - he is meant to have pointed to himself on viddie in court and exclaimed - that isnt me mate ! [ convicted]
however for THIS lady in court - perhaps she was preparing for the worst and saying - " that is not me - but I was there so you have got the wrong viddie !"
I think it is true to say that I have done more tribunal work than you and it is truly remarkable what ( lying ) witnesses will say to 'rectify' things
the defence have to pay for such and expert
and the lawyer will tell you if you dont pay for it you may go under
you will already have his fees as unrecoverable costs ....
and no I dont advise you to plead guilty to a sexual offence such as this on the grounds that you cant afford to defend ....
P P then what would you suggest if (as the defendant said could happen) I was put in this situation. I am a pensioner on pension credit , no cash no way to raise finance for a defence.
Faced with that situation what the hell do I do, apart from pleading guilty and hoping for a non custodial sentence?
As a tutor of mine once said ''The Law, Like the Ritz Hotel, is open to all.''
Faced with that situation what the hell do I do, apart from pleading guilty and hoping for a non custodial sentence?
As a tutor of mine once said ''The Law, Like the Ritz Hotel, is open to all.''
