Burnley fan Stewart Higgins, 53, was accused of using the N-word and the term 'black b******' in a racist tirade towards Brighton striker Gaetan Bong.
He and his son Nathan, 19, were also alleged to have used a homophobic slur to shout at Brighton fans in the stands at the Amex Stadium on February 9.String 'em up! No mercy! Hate crime!
But the pair walked free this afternoon after the Crown Prosecution Service failed to produce vital bodycam footage from police officers at the match.
Maria Higgins, defending, said that without the vital evidence it would be impossible for the case to proceed as the pair would not get a fair trial.Another CPS cock up. eh?
Dominic Dudkowski, prosecuting, apologised for the failure to produce the bodycam footage and said it was a serious oversight though he insisted the Crown Prosecution Service had not tried to manipulate the evidence.
During the trial it emerged that police bodycam footage of the pair which was thought to have been destroyed earlier was actually available.
Dominic Dudkowski, prosecuting, said a DVD of the footage was available but said the case would have to be adjourned as it could not be brought to the court immediately.
But the footage had neither been disclosed to the prosecution or the defence and as a result the case was stayed.The chair was clearly unimpressed with yet another example of the haplessness of the CPS:
Chair of the bench, Chris Bell, said: 'There are serious failing in bringing the evidence in this case.
'We're not prepared to adjourn this trial . We find, in the round, given these failings, the defendants would not receive a fair trial. We take the exceptional steps therefore in staying these proceedings.'Now consider this: the CPS would be expected to bring their A game to one of their beloved hate crime show trials. Why, then, do they make such basic errors?
And what sort of errors do they routinely make in lesser offences, like assault and murder?
Could it be that the camera footage didn't actually show the alleged "crime" taking place at all? Is it possible that producing the supposed evidence against the accused would have exonerated them?
ReplyDeleteIn all fairness, Plod and CPS deserve equal contempt and I have never disliked one more than the other.
ReplyDeleteKeep us updated Melvin. We hang on your every word
ReplyDeleteJaded
"Could it be that the camera footage didn't actually show the alleged "crime" taking place at all? Is it possible that producing the supposed evidence against the accused would have exonerated them?"
ReplyDeleteGiven the police and CPS well documented penchant for 'forgetting' all about evidence that would exonerate defendants, one has to suspect that its loss has more to do with it being detrimental to their case than mere incompetence.
Has it occurred to anyone that the poor PC Plod who attended this scene was, in fact, somewhat sympathetic to the fact that what is shouted during a footy match from the stands is not indicative of what the alleged perpetrator really believes? Possibly a twitch of the thumb might have 'accidentally' erased any footage of the incident? It has been known!
ReplyDelete"We hang on your every word" Many thanks, Jaded.
ReplyDeleteJust make the noose tight and the drop long.
"Has it occurred to anyone that the poor PC Plod who attended this scene was, in fact, somewhat sympathetic to the fact that what is shouted during a footy match from the stands is not indicative of what the alleged perpetrator really believes? Possibly a twitch of the thumb might have 'accidentally' erased any footage of the incident? It has been known!"
ReplyDelete30 years ago, most likely, 20 years ago possibly. Now, certainly not. Plod are all fully paid up SJWs now, and the likelihood of an officer deciding to give the Nelsonian eye to a 'hate crime'is akin to me finding Elvis in my garden shed. Even if he wanted to he'd be afraid to for fear of what his superiors would do if he was found out.
The police are now the armed wing of the identity politics Left, and everyone who has anything to do with them needs to remember that fact at all times.
Sobers you are only partly correct. Senior officers yes-trying to climb the greasy pole and towing the party line. Me and my front-line mates definitely not. We despair of their PC posturing for the media.
ReplyDeleteJaded
Wickedness breeds the fastest in the worst attempts to deny it; to shoulder the most senior police with all the blame for blatant corruption in the ranks.
ReplyDelete"Could it be that the camera footage didn't actually show the alleged "crime" taking place at all?"
ReplyDeleteThey are still supposed to disclose it if they have it. The police seem slow to grasp this.
"...was, in fact, somewhat sympathetic to the fact that what is shouted during a footy match from the stands is not indicative of what the alleged perpetrator really believes?"
I'm not sure that'd make me think better of them. Tampering with evidence is a no-no full stop.
"We despair of their PC posturing for the media."
Clearly, not enough of you do, though.