False accusation

[Harrowby Hall]

Liam Allen has had the charge of rape dismissed on the third day of his trial at Croydon Crown Court.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42365521

Mr Allen had been waiting for trial for two years. The police and the CPS were in possession of no fewer than 40,000 messages from the complainant in which she attested to her enjoyment of her encounters with him or which were encouraging messages to him. It is reported that he will be suing the Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service.

Aside from the actions (or non-actions) of the Met and CPS, what will happen to his accuser? So far, she has not been named - I believe that complainants in sex-related cases are not named. Will she simply disappear into permanent anonymity, her identity permanently protected by a well-meaning but inadequate law? Could she, too, be sued - for libel, presumably? Or could she face trial? No doubt had she entered the witness box and continued with her accusations she could be tried for perjury.

[Gordon]

Seems, from what is in the public domain, like a clear case of organisational failure for whatever reason, though it sounds like incompetence from what the barrister said when interviewed. I'd imagine, given what is reported, someone will look at the accuser's conduct in letting the prosecution proceed.

[Owlswing]

I'm sorry but, with regard to the accuser's continuing anonymity in such cases, this comes up every time a case such as this surfaces and is, as far as I am concerned, as much a failure of justice as is the ciontinuiny anonymity granted to Jon Venables, Jamie Bulger's murderer.

This despite his repeated re-offending with regards to his possession of pornographic child-abuse images. At the time of the Bulger murder, if I remember rightly, his defense team had his, Vernables', Social Services records withheld from being entered in evidence. Records which, reportedly, showed that he had been receiving treatment for behaviour "of a deviant nature".

There is really no point in bringing the matter of accuser anomnymity up each time as, until someone in a position to do so gets off their fat ugly overpaid politician arse and initiates a change in the law, such anonymous accusations are going to keep occurring ad nauseam ad infinitum    with the assisstance of the Human Rights legislation at present in place.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Liam Allen has had the charge of rape dismissed on the third day of his trial at Croydon Crown Court.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42365521

Mr Allen had been waiting for trial for two years. The police and the CPS were in possession of no fewer than 40,000 messages from the complainant in which she attested to her enjoyment of her encounters with him or which were encouraging messages to him. It is reported that he will be suing the Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service.

Aside from the actions (or non-actions) of the Met and CPS, what will happen to his accuser? So far, she has not been named - I believe that complainants in sex-related cases are not named. Will she simply disappear into permanent anonymity, her identity permanently protected by a well-meaning but inadequate law? Could she, too, be sued - for libel, presumably? Or could she face trial? No doubt had she entered the witness box and continued with her accusations she could be tried for perjury.

Libel, probably not. She could be charged with various criminal offences, no doubt somebody in the CPS is looking through the various statutes now, plod are quick enough to throw the book at minor offenders.

[floo]

To falsely accuse anyone of sexual abuse is of course very wrong indeed. It doesn't encourage the very many people who have made genuine accusations of abuse to come forward and report it.

[Robbie]

I saw that on the news last night, read about it today and was horrified. That poor man has had it hanging over his head for so long. Certainly there should be some sort of reckoning for his accuser - unless she is mentally ill in which case that should be made clear without giving away her identity in the media. Probably a lot of people know who she is already but not nationally.

[Owlswing]

Libel, probably not. She could be charged with various criminal offences, no doubt somebody in the CPS is looking through the various statutes now, plod are quick enough to throw the book at minor offenders.

The "plod" - don't prosecute (throw the book at) any offenders - major or minor - it is the C P S that does that and the "plod" define the C P S as the Criminal Protection Service for a very good reason.

[Robbie]

There have been other, similar, cases in recent times, I think I read of one where a guy actually went to prison but eventually his sentence was quashed. Yet mud sticks. It's frightening to think it could happen to anyone!

[Humph Warden Bennett]

The "plod" - don't prosecute (throw the book at) any offenders - major or minor - it is the C P S that does that and the "plod" define the C P S as the Criminal Protection Service for a very good reason.

Ever heard of a Fixed Penalty Notice?

[Humph Warden Bennett]

There have been other, similar, cases in recent times, I think I read of one where a guy actually went to prison but eventually his sentence was quashed. Yet mud sticks. It's frightening to think it could happen to anyone!

I read about that, he insisted in court that the penetration was her idea, and that she had demanded of him "Get your pants down". Yet the Jury believed her, and he was in prison for two years.

[Robbie]

You remember more detail than I, Humph! I certainly can't recall that so precisely.

(I'd hate to be on a jury, be so undecided & would always rather a guilty person go free than an innocent one be locked up. We'd be deadlocked, all the other jurors would hate me. Then I'd have a breakdown and retire from the world for a year. Hope I'm never called up. If it happens I'll be ill, or emigrate.)

[jeremyp]

This is not a comment about this case specifically.

If you have sex with somebody without their consent, it doesn't matter how many times previously they have sent you messages of love and admiration, how many times they have previously had consensual sex with you, if, on this occasion, they said no, it is still rape.

This is a comment about this case.

So the police had 40,000 messages attesting to the alleged victim's enjoyment of sex with the accused, it doesn't matter, if she said no on that one occasion, it is rape.

If she didn't say anything or give any indication of non consent, given their previous history, I guess the man could assume consent. Although, I'm bound to say that 40,000 messages sounds rather stalker-ish to me.

[Shaker]

I read about that, he insisted in court that the penetration was her idea, and that she had demanded of him "Get your pants down". Yet the Jury believed her, and he was in prison for two years.

I recall an essay in which (Vlad alert) R****** D****** called the jury system something like the best bad idea that anybody ever had: in other words it seems on first blush to be a good idea, but apply a bit of critical thought to it for two minutes and it's soon apparent why it's an unwashed pile of undergarments.

[jeremyp]

I recall an essay in which (Vlad alert) R****** D****** called the jury system something like the best bad idea that anybody ever had: in other words it seems on first blush to be a good idea, but apply a bit of critical thought to it for two minutes and it's soon apparent why it's an unwashed pile of undergarments.

Somebody I know was serving on a jury (not a rape trial) and one of the other jurors used "he had kind eyes" as an argument for innocence.

It's terrifying when you think about what rests on it.

[Shaker]

Somebody I know was serving on a jury (not a rape trial) and one of the other jurors used "he had kind eyes" as an argument for innocence.

Which was actually a Hancock's Half Hour episode. Truly. Except that that was meant to be comedy.

[jeremyp]

Which was actually a Hancock's Half Hour episode. Truly. Except that that was meant to be comedy.

It might have been but it did actually happen in a real jury trial.

[Shaker]

It might have been but it did actually happen in a real jury trial.

I believe you. And therein is the ridiculousness of it.

[Robbie]

Despite my personal fears about being a juror, I've always thought it a good idea to have a number of a cross section of non-legal people making decisions about things which affect all of us. I suppose the 'cross section' is the question, they are chosen at random.

What would you suggest as an alternative?

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Despite my personal fears about being a juror, I've always thought it a good idea to have a number of a cross section of non-legal people making decisions about things which affect all of us. I suppose the 'cross section' is the question, they are chosen at random.

What would you suggest as an alternative?

For most of my working life I was exempt from jury service, since I took legal exams & worked as a Paralegal (For Jeremy, that means "Legal Executive"). Then, whilst I was out of the country in the early naughties, the Labour Government changed the law. So I was finally plucked from the electoral role in the twenty teens. I found a blazer in my wardrobe which I had not worn since nineteen eighty erm, put on what looked like an old school tie, and looked as middle class and as conservative (reactionary) as I could, in the hope that the ethnic minority defendants' lawyers would object to me.

Sadly, they did not.

[Robbie]

Sounds like a plan, Humph. Pity it didn't work.

Some of my family members and friends have been jurors and had no problem. I wonder why I am so scared of it really but I think they don't call people after the age of 60 so if I can survive the next two and a bit years, I'll be in the clear. Or is it 65! Aaargh.

[Owlswing]

Ever heard of a Fixed Penalty Notice?

That is not 'throwing the book'! A Fixed Penalty Notice is where an offence is so blindingly obvious - PLEASE NOTE BLOODY GREAT "NO PARKING" SIGN - that you have convicted yourself.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

That is not 'throwing the book'! A Fixed Penalty Notice is where an offence is so blindingly obvious - PLEASE NOTE BLOODY GREAT "NO PARKING" SIGN - that you have convicted yourself.

If it is so obvious, how comes that I have seen off three parking tickets, one congestion charge notice, and two court summonses?

It is an attempt by plod & local councils to intimidate people into not fighting their corner. Plod issue FPN's for things like speeding.

[floo]

If it is so obvious, how comes that I have seen off three parking tickets, one congestion charge notice, and two court summonses?

It is an attempt by plod & local councils to intimidate people into not fighting their corner. Plod issue FPN's for things like speeding.

And how did you get out of them, go into hiding?

[Robbie]

There's a protocol for appealing against them & sometimes people win their appeal. Most don't bother, think it's not worth the hassle and easier to pay up even if they believe it isn't fair so enough money is made already.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

And how did you get out of them, go into hiding?

Parking Tickets-Inadequate signage in all cases, one cancelled by council, one the council did not appeal, one won on appeal.
Congestion Charge-No credit card, TfL had cancelled cash payments.
Summonses- Both won in front of the Judge.

I ain't just a menopausals pin up boy.