And Who is the Victim Here?

December 20, 2017 Longrider Civil Liberties, General News, misanthropy, Political 15

Well, I know and doubtless you will, too.

About 30 rape cases due to go to trial and “scores” more investigations are to be reviewed after the collapse of two cases in a week.

On Tuesday, prosecutors dropped a case against a man charged with raping a child under 16 due to police providing “relevant” evidence in recent days.

Last week, student Liam Allan’s trial collapsed because of the late disclosure of evidence.

The Met said the same officer worked on both cases and remains on full duty.

The BBC were interviewing an ex police officer today who was complaining that it wasn’t their fault because of “cuts” and they couldn’t resource their investigations properly. This is nonsense. The cases were assigned an investigation officer. He – or she – failed to do their job properly. They also don’t need “resources” to forward all of the evidence to the defence team. They fucked up. This has much to do with politicising the police and the culture in which they now operate. They have gone from not believing the “victim” to believing them unconditionally. Somewhere along the way, they lost the ability to conduct an impartial investigation of all of the relevant evidence. To do this they need to take a neutral stance of neither believing nor not believing until the evidence determines whether there is a case to answer. Then and only then, seek to charge.

So far, the accuser remains anonymous, despite the accused having their names dragged through the mud and put through hell while this has been going on. Also, will we see the accusers now prosecuted for perverting the course of justice?

Rape is a vile, vicious assault and needs to be properly investigated and punished. Allowing false allegations to be treated in the same way as real assaults undermines the whole process and those who do it should be punished – and their names published in the same way as their victims have been.

15 Comments

  1. It would seem that in some of these cases there is pretty much proof of the innocence of the accused right at the start. It would not surprise me at all if this was deliberate.

      • But don’t forget that we have the delightful fragrant Ms Alison Saunders who recently said “Just because he’s acquitted, it doesn’t mean he’s not guilty”.

        I wonder if she realises that the other side of that coin is “Just because he’s convicted, it doesn’t mean he is guilty”.

          • The appalling Saunders is also the person who has declared that ‘no real evidence’ will be required for a ‘hate crime’ conviction it all goes on the ‘perception’ of the alleged victim.

          • In that case, I look forward to her prosecution for her hate crime of misandry, as I am offended, upset and worried by what I perceive as her anti-male hate-filled agenda.

            I will happily give a statement to any concerned plod.

  2. Note the use of the word “victim” not complainant or accuser: it predisposes that a crime has been committed. If it is a false allegation then they are not a victim; they are the criminal.

  3. Given that the complainant handed over her phone for the Met to “read” could her defence to a charge of wasting police time be to say “it’s not my fault” that the case went as far as it did; if you had done your job the case would not have proceeded?

  4. The BBC were interviewing an ex police officer today who was complaining that it wasn’t their fault because of “cuts” and they couldn’t resource their investigations properly. This is nonsense. The cases were assigned an investigation officer. He – or she – failed to do their job properly. They also don’t need “resources” to forward all of the evidence to the defence team.

    Agree.

    BBC/C4, after doing the homeless rough sleepers sob story again report it as “lack of resources”, police unable to read all evidence.

    Bullshit on two counts:

    1. Detective Constable Mark Azariah told both defense lawyers & CPS the messages were “too personal” and contained nothing to undermine prosecution – he had read them, resources available. He lied aka perverting justice.

    2. Police are required to give all evidence to CPS and Defense – it is they, not police who “resource” examining the evidence.

    .
    I see the withholding of evidence as police responding to political pressure & CPS Alison Saunders demand more men are convicted.

    Shame on BBC/C4 for avoiding the “why” and knee-jerk blaming “Tory cuts”.

  5. I’ve personally never been able to understand why the accused in ALL criminal cases aren’t granted anonymity until such a time as they are found guilty. Sex crimes of any type clearly get the most attention and sell papers because of the public’s grubby interest in them, but surely being accused wrongly of something rather less salacious but nonetheless serious such as theft or fraud could do as much damage to someone’s professional life as being wrongly accused of a sex crime would have on their personal life. “Innocent until proven guilty,” should be applied much more rigorously towards all accused people to avoid the inevitable “trial by media” or “court of public opinion” (which tend, usually, to assume guilt in advance – that sells more papers, too). It would also avoid the bandwagon-jumping, too, as a bonus.

  6. It’s always the excuse that ‘it’s because of the cuts’. It’s NEVER because of the cuts.

    It’s because of the word that has one more letter than ‘cuts’.

Comments are closed.