A Tory MP's aide cleared of rape today said he could have been wrongly convicted if not for crucial evidence finally disclosed just days before his trial.
His defence team is understood to have waited up to nine months for phone and medical records which his accuser initially refused to hand over to police.When the 'victim' refuses to co-operate with the police, doesn't that ring alarm bells?
Apparently not!
The CPS denied that its disclosure was late, insisting that the evidence was handed over to the defence a day after the detective overseeing the case first examined it, throwing the spotlight on the police.
This evening a Met Police spokesman said the force was 'content with the investigation and our disclosure work'.This is no longer something than can be excused my examining the calibre of modern police officers, and concluding they are just a little bit dim. Nor is it, as Longrider points out, down to 'Tory cuts'.
This is deliberate. It starts from the top. It's ideological.
11 comments:
"Believe the victim" is a govt and CPS mantra that is now ingrained in the mindset of my colleagues working in sex-crimes. I was taught in my early days to believe no-one until the available evidence points you in the right direction.
My ex-wife made an allegation against me earlier this year which was a pack of lies. Unfortunately officers-who knew me personally-rushed round to my house and arrested me without doing any background research. It's a long story but the CPS dropped the case once I had disclosed all the lies she had told up to that point. These lies were easily available to the investigating officers as I had kept my Inspector and DPS (complaints) fully aware what she was up to. I even predicted over two years beforehand (when I first filed for divorce) that she would have me arrested. And yes I am suing my own force for unlawful arrest.
"Lights blue-touchpaper and stands back"
Jaded
Have we now adopted the politically-motivated and corrupt Napoleonic Code of "justice" used in the rest of Europe?
Or are these dreadful cases a result of thick (& sometimes "peaceful") plods and a useless CPS?
Napoleonic Code of "justice" used in the rest of Europe?
Sorry which countries of Europe still use the Napoleonic code?!? Far as I know most went onto an inquisitorial system years ago, a system which enshrines in dubio pro reo at it's heart without the need for those 12 whimsical darlings plucked at random from among Daily Mail readers.
Have a look at this one. https://crimbarrister.wordpress.com/2017/12/22/disclosure-doom-cockup-or-conspiracy/ I know you are a big fan of 'cutting deeper' but those of of us in the police or who had just retired in 2010 did say that that the police would absorb the cuts up to a point, then all bets would be off. What has happened since 2010 is that experienced detectives have retired or resigned. People are being posted to become detectives as no one wants to volunteer for the role, add to that the personal risk some of these roles carry and no one wants to be a detective any more. Training has been cut to the bone and replaced with useless computer based training. When I joined training was 16 weeks residential, later increased to 20 weeks residential followed by two days per month throughout the probationary period. If you wanted to be a detective you then had to be selected and then undergo an intensive 13 week residential course with pass/fail exams. You then became a substantive DC. To become a DS you had to pass the PC-PS exam and then undergo a further intensive 13 week DS course, this was followed by further subject specific training as you rose through the ranks. Of course a direct entry DI or Det Supt will be able to stop the direct entry DC from making mistakes.
The pressure from the government was always to cut training costs.
It does not help when the police have pressure put on them to increase conviction rates for rape/sexual offences - blame the politicians for that, for those who say the police should not be involved in politics look at the eagerness with which politicians seek to get involved with the police and use them when necessary. I believe PMTM with her placeman Tom Winsor said that complainants should always be believed, look where that has got us.
The bottom line is either you accept you don't want to pay much for policing in which case don't expect much and don't expect the private sector to step up to fill the gap(it won't).
As I have said, interesting times , and future historians will look back and say WTF was everyone thinking?
Retired
Apologies for the rant but what is going on will need a multi volume history to do justice to the wibbling insanity of the times we live in.
@Retired, that ties in -almost- with a friend's experience. He was a DS then they cut back the DS posts in his area and offered him a post a lot further way - 2hours a shift further commuting and a really unpleasant area . He went back into uniform. All those residential courses he went on to become a DS, all the training, all the Taxpayer £s...
BBC/C4 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".
"And yes I am suing my own force for unlawful arrest."
And I wish you the very best of British luck!
"Have we now adopted the politically-motivated and corrupt Napoleonic Code of "justice" used in the rest of Europe?"
If only! At least that would apply equally to all.
"I know you are a big fan of 'cutting deeper' but those of of us in the police or who had just retired in 2010 did say that that the police would absorb the cuts up to a point, then all bets would be off. What has happened since 2010 is that experienced detectives have retired or resigned."
This is NOT a 'cuts' issue, as Pcar points out.
"It does not help when the police have pressure put on them to increase conviction rates for rape/sexual offences - blame the politicians for that..."
This is indeed the crux of the matter. But if the police had stuck to Peelian principles and resisted this, they'd have had the backing of the public.
The problem is, the top brass don't want the backing of the public. They scorn it, in favour of the backing of increasingly out-of-touch progressive movements.
"Shame on BBC/C4 for avoiding the "why" and knee-jerk blaming "Tory cuts"."
They have a hammer, and see only nails...
"This is indeed the crux of the matter. But if the police had stuck to Peelian principles and resisted this, they'd have had the backing of the public."
Do you really believe that? How long do you think any officer would last if they did that? You seem to be very selective in what you want people to speak out on. You do not speak for the public any more than I do. In case you haven't noticed the politicians are elected to office and can claim to be getting the police to do what the electorate want. Will of the people and all that. The political parties are very good at spinning things and you don't like the public sector thwarting the will of the people do you? After all quite a few right wingers and left wingers want elected judges as well, that is a prospect that should fgill everyone with dread.
For better or worse we now have a system in England and Wales where the police are under direct political control with the PCC system. As I have said it will get a lot worse before it gets better.
Retired
BTW A DC carrying 20 current rape investigations is not sustainable. I have found in the past that comments such as 'just do your job' and 'work smarter, not harder' are delivered by people who have no clue, usually senior management or management consultant types.
Another:
Rape conviction quashed over new Facebook evidence, 22 December 2017
A 26-year-old man jailed in 2013* for rape has his conviction overturned by the Court of Appeal.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-42453405
imho tip of an iceberg
Who suffers?
Not the CPS, Police and Politicians.
The wrongfully prosecuted/jailed and the taxpayer - trial costs, compensation, .....
.
Liam Allan's barrister revealed a lot:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5207249/Female-barrister-cleared-student-rape-slams-police.html
.
Left SJW Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders described what happened to Liam as ‘regrettable’
That's it, ‘regrettable’? Almost ruining a man's future and two years of living in fear and all you say is ‘regrettable’. Alison Saunders is a pure evil left fascist.
I hope she chokes on a turkey bone on Christmas day - wishing her a miserable Christmas.
.
*@Jaded, @Retired
2013 - was that due to "the cuts" too?
imho due to T May's desire for more "rape" convictions regardless of evidence or guilt.
"How long do you think any officer would last if they did that?"
They can't sack you all. Why not stand up for what's RIGHT, for once? Rather than whinging and falling back on the 'I was just obeying orders!' line?
"I have found in the past that comments such as 'just do your job' and 'work smarter, not harder' are delivered by people who have no clue, usually senior management or management consultant types."
Welcome to the world of work. You know, the police 'service' is hardly unique in this...
"Who suffers?
Not the CPS, Police and Politicians."
No, sadly not.
"I hope she chokes on a turkey bone on Christmas day..."
The hag-faced old cow looks like she just has a bowl of broth & brown bread as a Christmas treat!
All current rape and serious sexual assault cases in England and Wales are to be reviewed "as a matter of urgency" to ensure evidence has been disclosed.
Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders warned the review could see "a number of cases" dropped.
It comes after the collapse of several rape trials because evidence had not been shared with defence lawyers.
'Several' being: Last year, 916 people had charges dropped over a failure to disclose evidence - up from 537 in 2014-15.
However, "Reviews of recent cases have shown a range of issues leading to failures but there has been no intention by officers to conceal information," Chief Constable Nick Ephgrave added. Intent would indeed bring an exacerbating and criminal element to this issue but i fail to understand how this can not have been known about, encouraged and far from intended but a in fact a determined effort to prosecute people regardless of innocence or guilt.
Post a Comment