Hate campaign and incompetent police

[Mikefromlondon]

she's hardly eating, losing her hair and she can't bring herself to do her open university work at all.
You'd think that they would have some kind of review process in place for a case like this where somebody may have been wrongly charged.
I've registered my complaints to them and told them that once this case is dismissed I'll be taking it a lot further by whatever means I can.
All they had to do was look at the fookin footage and act accordingly, now I'll be looking for blood. Bstrds

I know what it is like to be falsely accused of a charge, in your daughter's case assault by beating, trouble is whilst the CCTV camera does not show her beating her, but the other party may be accusing her of beating elsewhere out of CCTV camera's view, she may even have got false witness, so prepare for all eventualities, she may need a witness herself that at no time your daughter was out view of this witness and no way she hit her as she was all the time with this witness ( your daughter's witness)

Just ask her to pray to lord Jesus for help, truth will always win.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Just ask her to pray to lord Jesus for help,

You're not lapsing, are you?

truth will always win.

Yeah, right, that's how it works.

 

[Mikefromlondon]

Truth always wins in the end, but have you not heard of biased Judges, Biased Jury, Biased and corrupt authorities , how long before those girls were abused by jimmy and the truth came to light in the end, but he got away with it did he not? why did not anyone believe the girls and in latest case of liverpool inquest the unlawful killing of 96 fans.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Truth always wins in the end, but have you not heard of biased Judges, Biased Jury, Biased and corrupt authorities ,

Yes, of course, hence my comment.

how long before those girls were abused by jimmy and the truth came to light in the end, but he got away with it did he not?

He did.

why did not anyone believe the girls

They not only believed, they already knew, but hid it.

and in latest case of liverpool inquest the unlawful killing of 96 fans.

Again, the truth was hidden.

If it takes twenty seven years when it is virtually common knowledge, how long would it take for the unknown truth to emerge?



How many similar cases are there about which we know nothing?

 

[Mikefromlondon]

yes some of those jimmy's video clips (top of the pops, etc etc ) where he is seen to pinch a girls bottoms and he thought no one would be able to catch him, you see that girl react! but yes no one did catch him do it, while he was still alive and answerable, it was so blatantly obvious on those videos, yet no one seem to had the courage to confront him due to his star status, this is the thing, you could be totally innocent, and tell the truth, yet you could be taken as a liar, in the end, no matter how long after, the truth always comes out, it can't be hidden forever, not even in a 100 billion bins.

 

[sooey]

I promised an update on this, the case has now finished so here goes, I thought it best to carry on with this thread rather than start a new one and repeat stuff that's already written here.

Not all worried about the outcome of the case, there can only be one outcome.

How stupidly naïve of me.
My lovely innocent daughter has now been found guilty of assault and given a conditional discharge for twelve months, ordered to pay the "victim" £50 in compensation and ordered to pay costs.
Despite haranguing our own solicitors for the CCTV footage, which I believe shows her innocence, and a copy of the taped interview that my daughter was called in for with the police at the start of this business, I still haven't seen either.
It turned out that the solicitors we had were completely useless, (how does a person with no knowledge or experience of dealing with these people choose a good one?).
As far as the police were concerned I had a lot of contact with various people trying to get someone to view the CCTV footage and just hit a brick wall, resulting in them recording it as a formal complaint on my part and saying that they could not do anything until after the court case.
So the footage and the interview tape were with the CPS, at her first appearance the magistrate gave them 21 days to disclose. They never did, and the trial went ahead without them using either that or the tape.
The prosecution was based entirely on the testimony of 3 people against, and my daughter and her partner for.
The magistrate took the word of the three people against, who were all lying through their teeth (as the CCTV footage will eventually show), and dismissed what my daughter and her partner had to say.
The next step is obviously to go to appeal where we will have different solicitors, but this will be heard in the crown court, and if she loses again she will be liable for much stiffer penalties and costs.
As well as going to appeal where we will insist, through better (hopefully) solicitors, on the original CCTV footage as well as the tape of my daughters interview, I am now determined to make a complaint a of a very serious nature against the two people who instigated and facilitated this and of course the 3 witnesses who they "persuaded" to lie. Notably, they lied in court about things which according to my daughter who has seen the CCTV can be disproved by it.
One of the lies they told was that when my daughter was supposed to have "hit" the complainant, the complainant was sat with her baby on her knee.
All three emphasised that to make the case against sound even worse than it was. My daughter has a near perfect memory and has always stated that during the argument the baby was never on her mothers knee at any point, and the CCTV she has seen proves it. If that and other things they have lied about are proven to be lies it shows collusion between the witnesses.
I am going to see the police later on, there is a copper who has had some previous involvement and has shown himself to be fair and diligent in the past. So I am seeing him to start with to see what he thinks, I hope they will act on my allegations. But whatever happens, I want my serious allegations against the people involved to be recorded officially today. Then, when she is eventually found not guilty I can go back to the police and force their hand to investigate and hopefully this will see the people who are responsible for this behind bars. I also want the 3 liars to be punished, but they are largely irrelevant as far as I'm concerned and I don't really care what happens to them.
I have some questions which some people may be able to give insight on and I may start another thread for that.

 

[ajstoneservices]

When Michael Howard was home secretary he removed the right to jury trial in many cases knowing that conviction rates would go up in the police courts. They did.

He brought the dangerous dog act into being and that has been a disaster.

 

[Himaginn]

So the footage and the interview tape were with the CPS, at her first appearance the magistrate gave them 21 days to disclose. They never did, and the trial went ahead without them using either that or the tape.

That can only happen with your daughter's solicitor's agreement, and obviously your daughter's agreement.
If you truly believe that the CCTV evidence is an important part of your daughter's defence, you can pursue the production of this evidence during the appeal procedure.

I'm not sure that you, as her parent, have any rights to see the CCTV, or hear the interview tapes, unless you are her representative. You could, with her consent be present at her solicitors to watch/hear this evidence. But the police and prosecution would probably be breaking the law by providing this evidence to a third party, which you are considered to be, despite being her parent.

Edit, if the CCTV can show that the witnesses are telling at least one lie, it will destroy their credibility in the eyes of the judge. So, if you think it can do this, you (your daughter) should pursue the production of the CCTV. However, if it shows that your daughter is not a credible witness, it can work against you.

 

[Himaginn]

When Michael Howard was home secretary he removed the right to jury trial in many cases knowing that conviction rates would go up in the police courts. They did.

People still have the right to choose to be tried in a crown court.

BTW, an appeal procedure will not be in front of a jury, but in front of a judge, and one or two magistrates, not just magistrates, and not a jury.
Procedure explained here:
https://www.gov.uk/appeal-against-sentence-conviction/magistrates-court-verdict
Note the 21 days limit!

He brought the dangerous dog act into being and that has been a disaster.

A bit irrelevant, unless you have sooey in mind.
That was a joke, sooey, not an opportunity to have a pop at you, because I wouldn't exploit such an opportunity on a sombre thread like this. So please take it in the spirit in which it was intended.

 

[sooey]

In this case I believe our appeal will have to be heard in the crown court by a crown court judge and two magistrates.
That will not be a good prospect for the young girl who works at the place where the incident took place, and whose mother walked into the public gallery as she entered court to give evidence, and was on friendly first name terms with the two people who are behind this, she was greeted by them with the words "Hi Jackie", said in a very familiar manner. She was the main independent witness whose testimony carried more weight because of that.
She gave her "evidence" (all lies) and as she walked out of the court went into complete meltdown, sobbing uncontrollably and having to be supported out by her mother. She thought it was all over so she won't relish the prospect of having to lie again, this time to a crown court judge.

 

[sooey]

That can only happen with your daughter's solicitor's agreement, and obviously your daughter's agreement.
If you truly believe that the CCTV evidence is an important part of your daughter's defence, you can pursue the production of this evidence during the appeal procedure.

The rules of disclosure by the CPS are written in a very complicated way as these things usually are.
But my understanding is that the CPS must disclose any evidence they have which they are going to use, and ALSO any evidence they have which is thought would be harmful to their case or helpful to the defence.
There are two things here which fit that category, the CCTV obviously, and also the tape of my daughters police interview, where she will be heard correcting points that the PC was putting to her from witness statements, and being proved right when she was allowed to view the CCTV later.
We have 21 days to start the appeal and we will do so as soon as we find a decent criminal defence solicitor. We will be insisting on the original CCTV footage and the original tape.

 

[Himaginn]

The rules of disclosure by the CPS are written in a very complicated way as these things usually are.
But my understanding is that the CPS must disclose any evidence they have which they are going to use, and ALSO any evidence they have which is thought would be harmful to their case or helpful to the defence.
There are two things here which fit that category, the CCTV obviously, and also the tape of my daughters police interview, where she will be heard correcting points that the PC was putting to her from witness statements, and being proved right when she was allowed to view the CCTV later.

My point about the case continuing without the CCTV was literally that, only with your daughter's consent could the case have continued with some evidence missing which should be there. She had the right, obviously with her solicitor's advice, to say No, I do not want the case to continue until the evidence is made available.
However, that is too late now, it's past. However, she can start the appeal procedure and insist the CCTV evidence is made available for that appeal, and that appeal can not be heard until that evidence is made available.
She can stop the appeal procedure before it is heard, if she chooses.
Legal aid is not always granted for appeals. It is granted on probability, public interest and the financial ability of the appellant.

 

[sooey]

We have been told by a third party that legal aid will not be given for my daughters appeal, because her own solicitor has advised her against making one on the grounds that the punishment was so light. I have my doubts as to whether or not that is correct, and in any case it does not address the most important question of her innocence. As I said the solicitors we used have proved themselves to be worse than useless.

 

[JohnD]

How confident are you that the CCTV recording that you have not seen, shows what you think it does?

 

[sooey]

How confident are you that the CCTV recording that you have not seen, shows what you think it does?

That is the question.
I am entirely confident on that, I have questioned my daughter at length about it on numerous occasions. She has an incredible memory and she says that as the police constable was questioning her at her interview, he was putting events to her taken from the witness statements of the complainant and her friend.
She was correcting him from her own memory and did so on a number of occasions, one of the points was the baby on the knee I have mentioned. Another thing they said was that my daughter walked around the complainants friend and past the complainant to go back to her table, and it was as she did so they say she struck the blow. My daughters table was behind and to the side of her as she faced the complainant, and she did not walk round or past them to go back to it. In fact her partner had heard the commotion and went across to my daughter, she was shouting at the complainant who had been very provocative, and he says he had his arms around her with her arms down at her side as he pulled her away. My daughter says that the CCTV footage she was shown was clear enough to make all of this out and it proved what she said was right.