Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Neil Down

CLEARED

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, La Colombe said:

Well I'll tell you what, I wouldn't take any kids to any MNH sites in future. You can't be too careful.

Why not LC?  In the face of this lighting fast acquittal?

Hang on, you're just trolling aren't you, and I fell for it hook, line etc.

You're a scamp aintcha!

 

Oh, edited to add, happy birthday asshole! ;)

Edited by PottyLisa
HBD Asshole!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Declan said:

The danger of "naming and shaming" her is that it could prevent other victims from coming forward. 

It's not hard to imagine a scenario where a woman has genuinely been raped and the cops get the wrong man OR there's not enough evidence to convict and the perpetrator goes free. I worry that would play on victims minds. "If they don't convict, I'll be named and shamed" it would require lots of faith in the cops and the courts to come forward then.

In this case, If she's genuinely lied and is not just mistaken, then of course she should prosecuted. At that point the court, with all the facts, can decide whether or not she can be named publicly, taking into account any impact on the child. 

Your opening sentence is badly worded in my opinion, as it implies that there was a victim in this case.

( you said other victims)

( actually the victim was the defendant )

Edited by dilligaf
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair point, because there's a real case but we're often talking about general circumstances there's often a need to use clarification (as the large number of commas in the rest of my post and brackets in yours illustrate.) But I got it wrong in the opening sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"" ... Bogus accusation..."", "" vexatious accusation...""

The woman made neither of these, she acted on what her 4 yo Daughter had told her.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kopek said:

"" ... Bogus accusation..."", "" vexatious accusation...""

The woman made neither of these, she acted on what her 4 yo Daughter had told her.

 

So having read all the info published and all that’s posted on here,  you think that.?

Truely amazing

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kopek said:

"" ... Bogus accusation..."", "" vexatious accusation...""

The woman made neither of these, she acted on what her 4 yo Daughter had told her.

 

Really!!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes really, if you read the papers account of the court evidence there is nothing to indicate that the Mother had decided to exaggerate on what her Daughter had told her .

Whether it was wise to rely on a four year olds interpretation of the situation, whether it was prudent of the Police and prosecution to take the matter further is open to debate but we cannot doubt the Mothers' concern at what she had been told by her Daughter.

Who, in a similar situation, would not have reacted in the same way to the Mother? Would a psychologist have recommended to brush it off, not draw attention to it? Who knows.

Did the Child have a heightened awareness of 'abuse' due to overhearing adult conversations? Did the Mother, due to those conversations, have a lowered tolerance of "" totally innocent"" situations? It was hours before the Mother reported the matter to the Police, did she have conversations that led her to take that step?

These we will never know.

To call for the naming the Mother and therefore the Child , is a vengeful call for 2 wrongs make a right. The Mother acted as most parents would, bearing in mind the psychologists opinion and to infer some deeper vindictive motive is way off the mark.

Edited by Kopek
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kopek said:

Yes really, if you read the papers account of the court evidence there is nothing to indicate that the Mother had decided to exaggerate on what her Daughter had told her .

Whether it was wise to rely on a four year olds interpretation of the situation, whether it was prudent of the Police and prosecution to take the matter further is open to debate but we cannot doubt the Mothers' concern at what she had been told by her Daughter.

Who, in a similar situation, would not have reacted in the same way to the Mother? Would a psychologist have recommended to brush it off, not draw attention to it? Who knows.

Did the Child have a heightened awareness of 'abuse' due to overhearing adult conversations? Did the Mother, due to those conversations, have a lowered tolerance of "" totally innocent"" situations? It was hours before the Mother reported the matter to the Police, did she have conversations that led her to take that step?

These we will never know.

To call for the naming the Mother and therefore the Child , is a vengeful call for 2 wrongs make a right. The Mother acted as most parents would, bearing in mind the psychologists opinion and to infer some deeper vindictive motive is way off the mark.

How can it be other than a vindictive motive proven by the speed at which the jury. came to their decision? What is sad about all this is that people (myself included) would hesitate before coming to the aid of a distressed child in case their motives were misinterpreted.

What sort of a society have we become? 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could any jury really conclude any defendant guilty given that the prosecution evidence appeared to be centred around the statement of a four year-old child? With no other witnesses to the alleged crime?

There's probably very few 4 year old girls who are aware of casual improper touching or how to interpret what constitutes 'touching,' let alone have the vocabulary to explain the circumstances, unless of course it's in the extreme.

It must be a very difficult decision to make for the investigators and presumably, specialist counsellors, when dealing with such allegations to interpret what they hear from such a young child. And there's always a risk of over-zealous questioning and interpretation; a possibility of 'leading the witness' even when that witness (the only one in this case) is a four year old child.

Given all that, and the swiftness of the verdict, it's difficult to see how the PPU and the AG saw a realistic chance of conviction. Be interesting to know what swayed it. 

Edited by quilp
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why was the mother not helping the child to try on the clothing? Surely you would not wander off and leave a 4 year old to struggle into some sort of costume on her own.     This was a deliberate attempt of revenge over a dispute with the MHT and I maintain if the accused is named so should the accuser.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that shortly there will be another trial in respect of a person charged with gross indecency and indecent assault. I have no idea of the facts of the case but are the BBC wrong then to report a person has been committed for trial and given their name and address. I have no knowledge of the case beyond what is posted on the BBC page and by the logic of many posting here it should not be reported unless the person is found guilty. I am not of that opinion. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-45302959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if there'll be a compelling photograph and suggestive block-letter headline on the front page of the local rag with regards to this case? Not that I'd advocate doing so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, PottyLisa said:

There is an argument to be made that this Lady should be named if only to protect others from bogus accusation. Granted, she now has a track record but this must have been so unpleasant for the poor man.  I have no idea how he's handling it since the verdict but if something happened, and it was a direct result of this accusation, would this girl be in any way culpable?

I release this all seems a bit dramatic but I've heard excuses made for her, fuck that.  There is NO excuse. Not for this.

I was reading about an unrelated case, in Liverpool, where a guy killed himself on release from prison.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/mum-lied-ex-partner-him-15069531

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lost Login said:

It appears that shortly there will be another trial in respect of a person charged with gross indecency and indecent assault. I have no idea of the facts of the case but are the BBC wrong then to report a person has been committed for trial and given their name and address. I have no knowledge of the case beyond what is posted on the BBC page and by the logic of many posting here it should not be reported unless the person is found guilty. I am not of that opinion. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-45302959

Theyll only complain if he's found not guilty..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...