harvey19 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 One assumes that the CPS considered the case strong enough. Secondly, if the abuse was historic, there wouldn't be any forensic evidence. It appears in this case it was simply one person's word against anothers. Without evidence/proof I feel it strange this case reached court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I think he was charged for the reason already discussed. There's a thirst for more convictions and the police and CPS fear being criticised for not bringing cases to court. They want bums on cell seats, guilty or not. Given that the government are trying to keep offenders out of prison and the CPS is an agency of the government how can that argument hold water? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I think he was charged for the reason already discussed. You assume that. I don't join you. It appears in this case it was simply one person's word against anothers. Most rape cases are, to a large degree. It's rare that the crime has a witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 The CPS said it felt that it was "in the public interest" to do so. I think it was because if they didn't proceed they'd be accused of another Saville-BBC style whitewash and cover up, so thought they'd let it go to a jury to decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 You assume that. I don't join you. Most rape cases are, to a large degree. It's rare that the crime has a witness. But it is very rare that any case reaches court without corroborating or forensic evidence. Are we now lowering the threshold to charge a person and proceed to trial ? I fully appreciate that there may be factors we are ignorant of but it appears that in this case it was solely one persons word against anothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 CPS defends prosecution of Coronation Street actor http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10300520/Michael-Le-Vell-CPS-defends-prosecution-of-Coronation-Street-actor.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 CPS defends prosecution of Coronation Street actor http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10300520/Michael-Le-Vell-CPS-defends-prosecution-of-Coronation-Street-actor.html The article describes a vague justification to prosecute without substantiating the decision with detailed facts relating to evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Yep. Like I said, no evidence either way but throwing it to the public to decide so they can't be accused of covering up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 But it is very rare that any case reaches court without corroborating or forensic evidence. Are we now lowering the threshold to charge a person and proceed to trial ? I fully appreciate that there may be factors we are ignorant of but it appears that in this case it was solely one persons word against anothers. It's not usual but it's not unheard of and often in rape/sexual assault cases it's one person's word against another. The argument usually relates to issues of consent, how it was given and how the defendant regarded it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 It's not usual but it's not unheard of and often in rape/sexual assault cases it's one person's word against another. The argument usually relates to issues of consent, how it was given and how the defendant regarded it. But it is completely different in this case where the defendant denied any offence had taken place whereas in your example it is agreed that an act was undertaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.