Julie Reilly, prosecuting, told magistrates: 'Some time has been spent dealing with this matter before the start of proceedings.Perhaps 71 year old disabled war widow Renate Bowling didn't feel she was the criminal here, Julie?
'This defendant lives five doors away from a neighbour whose daughter is the boyfriend of the complainant.
'On May 12 he says he was playing football in the street when there was an incident between himself and the defendant.
'The police were called and had the defendant accepted her criminality in prodding the aggrieved in the chest there and then this could well have been dealt with in a different way.'
Amazing how the police turned out so fast too, isn't it?
5 comments:
I got lost at his bit and could not carry on....
...a neighbour whose daughter is the boyfriend of the complainant...
WTF is that all about?
I'm hoping it was just a typo, but, well, this is the Noughties...
No typo, just The Mainly Fail ;-)
Seriously, I couldn't bring myself to have a big pop at the prosecuting barrister here. Their job is to ignore the emotive bits and simply to be the advocate for the CPS case and argue it to the best of their ability, just the same as they have to do when they defend someone they privately believe to be guilty as hell. Yes, in a way it must kind of like a hooker whispering to her client that he's the best she's had - a little bullshit is part of the job they're paid to do. But I do think the police and CPS deserve some serious stick for arresting and charging the poor old dear in the first place. An easy arrest with an almost guaranteed result for the clear up figures might have been just too hard to resist.
Originally Mrs Bowling had intended to deny the offence but after a long deliberation between the Crown Prosecution Service and her defence, Mrs Bowling admitted the charge of assault.
Yes it porably is easier to browbeat a 71 year old who actuallu knows the difference between right and wrong with your double-speak. Than try and explain it to some scrote who has no idea of either concept.
And WTF was her defence brief doing, they should have taken it to a jury, none would convict. He/she was either bullied/ threatened themselves or is hoping for a job in the CPS at some stage.
"Seriously, I couldn't bring myself to have a big pop at the prosecuting barrister here. Their job is to ignore the emotive bits and simply to be the advocate for the CPS case and argue it to the best of their ability.."
Oh, I know. But I can't help thinking that Ms Reilly's parents can't be too proud of their daughter's employment choice on reading that quote in the newspapers...
"Yes it porably is easier to browbeat a 71 year old who actuallu knows the difference between right and wrong with your double-speak. Than try and explain it to some scrote who has no idea of either concept."
Perhaps we should stop recruiting the lazy and cowardly to the police force?
Post a Comment