A student has been spared jail for a false rape claim which led to a man being arrested and detained for nine hours.
Well, of course
Byron, then studying at Teeside University, was trying to win back a former boyfriend with the claim, Teesside Crown Court was told.
Her barrister, Brian Russell, described it as extremely foolish behaviour and urged the judge to depart from the usual punishment of prison.
Well, it seems he didn't need much urging...
After the case, PC James Emery, of Cleveland Police, said: 'The innocent victim of the defendant's malicious report has been put through an enormous amount of stress, having found himself arrested, detained and questioned at length for an allegation that has now been proven to be fictitious.'
And whose fault is that?
Point of order: the "usual" punishment of prison? Srsly?
Well at least he hasn't had his name and photograph on the front page (nearly covering the front page, I should say) of a major national newspaper - unlike another unfortunate innocent, yesterday.
Needless to say, the identity of the accuser was nowhere even hinted at.
It's time this outrageous bias was corrected.
A suspect was detained and interrogated, but provided police with evidence to show he had not raped the psychology student.
"Point of order: the "usual" punishment of prison? Srsly?"
I know, how'd that slip in there!?
"Well at least he hasn't had his name and photograph on the front page (nearly covering the front page, I should say) of a major national newspaper - unlike another unfortunate innocent, yesterday."
Indeed! I wonder just what that was? Footage on a mobile..?
It doesn't matter.
Upon an accusation of rap,e where the suspect can be identified, he is arrested. Simple. The rest follows. Photographed, fingerprinted and dna-ed. His dna will be kept on file, and even when the police delete their information his dna profile will be kept by the laboratory that analysed the sample.
It's what you get when the successful prosecution rate is so abysmally low. It follows-on from having to assign secrecy to the victim to get them to give evidence. the COURT could have allowed publication of the supposed victims name/address. One supposes that it was not allowed because of the chance of retribution ?
In cases like these, can a private prosecution be brought against the false accuser? I know the usual caveats about beating a dead horse and the unlikelihood of receiving any recompense apply, but this silly little bitch deserves being out through the wringer a bit longer.
Post a Comment