ChatterBank0 min ago
Their Word Against Yours In Court
My Sister is facing charges of racial and religious verbal abuse, section 31 (1) c and 5 of crime disorder act. also section 4a and 5a public order act.
This is due to her neighbor lies that have been going on for years.
It is going to be held at a magistrates court in a few months.
There is no evidence that proves one way or another. My sister does have a witness. But its all based one one word against another.
My sister has no record and there will never be any evidence on any racial or threats of any kind.
Her neighbor is a serial complainer who has also abused her race card to other people, can this be used?
She is a very pale mixed race women who could easily pass for a white women, will this be taken into consideration?
Does the magistrate have to be beyond reasonable doubt before the convict?
I wondering in these cases what are the magistrates looking for as how can a person be convicted when there is no evidence.
Many Thanks for any advice here
This is due to her neighbor lies that have been going on for years.
It is going to be held at a magistrates court in a few months.
There is no evidence that proves one way or another. My sister does have a witness. But its all based one one word against another.
My sister has no record and there will never be any evidence on any racial or threats of any kind.
Her neighbor is a serial complainer who has also abused her race card to other people, can this be used?
She is a very pale mixed race women who could easily pass for a white women, will this be taken into consideration?
Does the magistrate have to be beyond reasonable doubt before the convict?
I wondering in these cases what are the magistrates looking for as how can a person be convicted when there is no evidence.
Many Thanks for any advice here
Answers
1 to 15 of 15
When your sister attends court tell her to get there early and ask advice from the clerk to the court. They are well used to helping people who are giving evidence alone and will give good advice. Whatever she does do not let her mention the other persons ethnicity , it is not part of the evidence and is not relevant. The case will be heard on the evidence as...
20:42 Sat 07th Sep 2013
Don't use the fact the neighbour is a serial complainer, don't "rubbish" the other person AT ALL, it will only count against your sister.
Tell your sister to just keep saying over and over again that SHE DID NOT say those things (but don't accuse the neighbour directly of lying).
Let the neighbour gradually dig a hole for herself.
Tell your sister to just keep saying over and over again that SHE DID NOT say those things (but don't accuse the neighbour directly of lying).
Let the neighbour gradually dig a hole for herself.
A particularly good answer from TTT remember your Sister has to prove nothing it is for the prosecution to prove she is guilty. If there is no proof she is guilty then she nothing to be concerned over, though I am also surprised the CPS have decided to charge your Sister as they only usually do this when they believe they can prove the charges.
Thank you so much for your needed advice, I absolutely agree with shock on how the cps allowed this to go to court.
The solicitor believes because this dispute has gone on for so long that they are just throwing to the courts. Which is not fair on my sister as she has never done anything wrong, also this neighbor has a string of complaints against her by 5 other people. Sadly she is very aware of the power of the race card and the power it hold in this country at the moment.
The solicitor believes because this dispute has gone on for so long that they are just throwing to the courts. Which is not fair on my sister as she has never done anything wrong, also this neighbor has a string of complaints against her by 5 other people. Sadly she is very aware of the power of the race card and the power it hold in this country at the moment.
A person making a statement to the police (and being prepared to attend court to be cross examined by the other side if the statement is not “accepted”) constitutes evidence. In fact the vast majority of evidence heard in Magistrates’ courts and Crown courts consists simply of descriptions of events provided by witnesses in the form of statements to the police accompanied by oral evidence in court.
Your sister does not have to give evidence in her defence. If she does not the Magistrates will reach their verdict based on what they hear from the prosecution together with the performance of prosecution witnesses under cross examination.
So there is evidence and this is the evidence that the Magistrates will consider. As has been said, they have to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant before they can convict.
Your sister does not have to give evidence in her defence. If she does not the Magistrates will reach their verdict based on what they hear from the prosecution together with the performance of prosecution witnesses under cross examination.
So there is evidence and this is the evidence that the Magistrates will consider. As has been said, they have to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant before they can convict.
It works like this, Simon:
If a witness makes a statement to the police and a prosecution follows the prosecution (usually the CPS) will show that statement to the defence as part of their “disclosure“ before the trial. The defence has the right to request that the witness attends court and gives evidence in person. This means that they can then be cross examined by the defence (that is, the defence can question them , put alternative scenarios to them, generally challenge their version of events). If the witness does not attend court their statement cannot be used in evidence without the agreement of the defence (which is unlikely to be forthcoming if the evidence is disputed).
A similar process operates the other way round and if the defence wants to use evidence provided by a witness who has made a statement supporting the defendant’s version of events they too must attend court or the evidence provided in the statement cannot be used.
All statements (for both sides) form evidence. But they can only be used in isolation (i.e. without the witness attending court to give evidence in person) if the opposing side agrees.
If a witness makes a statement to the police and a prosecution follows the prosecution (usually the CPS) will show that statement to the defence as part of their “disclosure“ before the trial. The defence has the right to request that the witness attends court and gives evidence in person. This means that they can then be cross examined by the defence (that is, the defence can question them , put alternative scenarios to them, generally challenge their version of events). If the witness does not attend court their statement cannot be used in evidence without the agreement of the defence (which is unlikely to be forthcoming if the evidence is disputed).
A similar process operates the other way round and if the defence wants to use evidence provided by a witness who has made a statement supporting the defendant’s version of events they too must attend court or the evidence provided in the statement cannot be used.
All statements (for both sides) form evidence. But they can only be used in isolation (i.e. without the witness attending court to give evidence in person) if the opposing side agrees.
I wish the neighbor recorded it as it would prove my sisters innocents and it would have ended with her in court and not my sister.
I think video can be used as long as it keeps within the law, Like not filming someone in their house or garden.
But truth be told I couldn't be certain it can be used if it is only audio.
I think video can be used as long as it keeps within the law, Like not filming someone in their house or garden.
But truth be told I couldn't be certain it can be used if it is only audio.
When your sister attends court tell her to get there early and ask advice from the clerk to the court. They are well used to helping people who are giving evidence alone and will give good advice.
Whatever she does do not let her mention the other persons ethnicity , it is not part of the evidence and is not relevant.
The case will be heard on the evidence as explained by NJ and nothing else. From what I see here the other persons evidence will be very 'shaky' at best and she will not be able to stand up to cross examination. Just tell your sister to stay calm and tell the truth, she should be fine and be found not guilty.
Whatever she does do not let her mention the other persons ethnicity , it is not part of the evidence and is not relevant.
The case will be heard on the evidence as explained by NJ and nothing else. From what I see here the other persons evidence will be very 'shaky' at best and she will not be able to stand up to cross examination. Just tell your sister to stay calm and tell the truth, she should be fine and be found not guilty.
1 to 15 of 15
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.