Malkinson case

[gas112]

Should the person who made the decision be jailed a fitting sentence would be the length of time Malkinson spent in jail after this evidence came to light

Police and CPS had key DNA evidence 16 years before Andrew Malkinson cleared of rape

Exclusive: No action taken despite 2007 discovery of searchable male DNA profile on rape victim’s top that did not match Malkinson’s

www.theguardian.com

 

[crystal ball]

Maybe but only after an inquiry and possibly lengthy trial

 

[noseall]

Should the person who made the decision be jailed a fitting sentence would be the length of time Malkinson spent in jail after this evidence came to light

Police and CPS had key DNA evidence 16 years before Andrew Malkinson cleared of rape

Exclusive: No action taken despite 2007 discovery of searchable male DNA profile on rape victim’s top that did not match Malkinson’s

www.theguardian.com

Ask trans. Graveyards would be full of innocent dead people, if ever he got his chance to make the rules.

 

[IT Minion]

No, it's a stupid idea.

Locking up the team that made the decision would be illegal. But pretending that didn't matter it would make staffing that team impossible in the future, no one would take the job.

 

[Odds]

In cases like this you could put the failure to produce the evidence down to incompetence...but such a long period of time suggests a sinister intent somewhere in the system. Questions must be answered by the people concerned.

 

[IT Minion]

The justice system leans towards refusing appeals. The threshold is very high and the laws are set up to make it hard. Throw in austerity and there was no money to process them either.

 

[Odds]

Fresh dna evidence isn't hearsay or rumour. They had a duty to produce this evidence and their failure to do so cannot be put down to political failure by the government.

 

[Brigadier]

But pretending that didn't matter it would make staffing that team impossible in the future, no one would take the job.

We all have consequences for the decisions we take, or don't take, in our jobs and our lives.

The decision makers should not be indemnified, as those who have to live with the outcomes are not indemnified.

And don't even get me started on stuff like "Royal Mail" persecuting those postmasters, because it wasn't: it was individuals, protected by the cloak of the organisation.

Whatever happened to "better a thousand guilty men go free, than one innocent man be punished"?

 

[Odds]

We all have consequences for the decisions we take, or don't take, in our jobs and our lives.

Whatever happened to "better a thousand guilty men go free, than one innocent man be punished"?

Because a thousand guilty men in this case would go on to rape and murder a thousand innocent women, while he rots in jail, denied the justice he really deserved.

 

[Brigadier]

Because a thousand guilty men in this case would go on to rape and murder a thousand innocent women, while he rots in jail, denied the justice he really deserved.

Applying your logic, why not jail a thousand innocent men (to satisfy your desire to be seen to be doing "something"), while a thousand guilty men are free to rampage anyway?

 

[Odds]

I have a concern justice was not done for Mr Malkinson after new evidence was suppressed.
Other hypothetical cases need not apply in this matter.

 

[gas112]

The justice system leans towards refusing appeals. The threshold is very high and the laws are set up to make it hard. Throw in austerity and there was no money to process them either.

Refusing to refer his case for appeal in 2012 and explaining why it would not conduct further DNA testing, the CCRC told Malkinson the COST of forensic investigation was not its “overriding consideration”
.
So what was their overriding reason

 

[IT Minion]

We all have consequences for the decisions we take, or don't take, in our jobs and our lives.

The decision makers should not be indemnified, as those who have to live with the outcomes are not indemnified.

And don't even get me started on stuff like "Royal Mail" persecuting those postmasters, because it wasn't: it was individuals, protected by the cloak of the organisation.

Whatever happened to "better a thousand guilty men go free, than one innocent man be punished"?

So, let's pretend you're doing the reviews now. You see a hundred a year with let's say an average of five years left to serve.

If you want to spend an equal time working as you do in prison you'd need to be right 499 times out of 500.

How much do you want to be paid?

 

[Brigadier]

Other hypothetical cases need not apply in this matter.

Then why introduce them?

 

[gas112]

If it turns out that the guy now bailed for the rape has carried out more rapes in the time after the evidence first came to light should the victims be allowed to sue ?