My Story... (LONG)... Input helpful and I am happy to discuss.

[whatsgoingon?]

I'm not sure heart-attacks are allowed on here.... perhaps one of the Moos could intervene! Have a break and some catch-up and quality time with your folks -you all deserve it. Besides... you'll need to build your strength up for the next bit ...

[Izzy]

Definitely don't want any heart attacks!
Seriously though, I think that a big part of the problem is that once a FA is made, everyone in the system has their part to play but no-one is in charge.
You have so many people in different departments who have a role to play and as long as they do it legally and properly that's all that matters. (to them)

[lawlessone2009]

I'm headed for a heart attack Izzy...

It appears the bananas were premature.

Well, they weren't.

Then again, they could be!

Confused?

So am I.

Scotlands great justice system is not quite as great as it once was, if it ever was! I believed that it was 'fairer' than the English system but it appears that it's just as corrupt now!

The 'Moorov' argument that could've been used in my case was so weak it was almost laughable if it wasn't such a serious allegation with serious consequences. It appears that Mr Moorov is to become Mr Ramage. Apparently there is an appeal going through at the moment in relation to Matthew Ramage which if certain points are argued successfully then the sweeping powers of Moorov will fall under even greater powers of Ramage.

I fail to see how the allegations against me are in anyway related to Mr Ramage but it seems that they are! Apparently a ruling will be applied 'retrospectively' ( Applying to or influencing the past; retroactive.) and could well 'catch' me within their reach.

The 'special cause' could also be reinterpreted apparently...

That leaves a slight issue that maybe someone could assist me with???

There are TWO seperate allegations. I was questioned with regards the first one (and voluntarily gave a DNA sample!) years ago. The sample clearly came back clear and all that happened was an interview under caution. No actual caution or charge or even a bloody acknowledgement/notice of intended disposal...

The recent one I was charged on. Formally charged. Clearly the DNA, lack off!, thwarted their case considerably but good old (I'm being sarcastic there!) Moorov was waiting in the wings. Appears that he also suffered some kind of mishap so there 'wasn't' any case.

If the appeal is somehow successful then an indictment could theoretically be served although outwith the 12 months allowance. Utilising 'special cause' which my solicitor/Advocate are prepared to fight tooth and nail to ensure cannot be used I have a further question for you all...

I was never charged with anything in relation to the first false allegation. I have never BEEN charged with anything in relation to the first false allegation. There have never been any charges at all in relation to the first false allegation...

Moorov:


The Moorov doctrine is a mechanism which applies where a person is accused of two or more separate offences, connected in time and circumstances. In such a case, where each of the offences charged is spoken to by a single credible witness, that evidence may corroborate, and be corroborated by, the other single witnesses, so as to enable the conviction of the accused on all the charges. In order for the doctrine to operate, each of the offences must be competently charged. It is not possible to rely for corroboration of a charge upon evidence of conduct, however similar, in respect of which the accused has previously been convicted or acquitted. The operation of the doctrine involves similar issues to cases of similar fact evidence, since it permits evidence relating to one alleged crime to be used in support of a charge relating to a separate incident. We have considered the origins and present state of the doctrine, and whether any reform is required. In particular, we have considered whether it would be appropriate, as part of a wider reform of the law of similar fact evidence, to allow corroboration to be found in evidence of similar offences which cannot be tried on the same indictment, such as, for example, offences in relation to which the accused has already been tried and acquitted or convicted.


Is the 'charge' as interpreted the charges on an indictment or would the Police have to have charged?

I am assuming on the indictment but surely the Police must charge or the prosecution must at least give notice of what they are intending to do? It's only added to my confusion over the year as I have had no indication what the hell is happening or if they are even going to be using 'Moorov'. Hell, they could be on a completely different track! Surely the prosecution should be at the very least laying out their intentions at some point?

I'm stocking up on ammo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Izzy]

I'm sorry L1,

I am confused

Are they threatening to use a technicality dependant on the outcome of this appeal?

I can't find any info on the Ramage appeal on-line, but I've read the Moorov document and my interpretaion of it is that it can be
brought in if there are two charges so I can't see how they can use it if there was no charge for the first FA.

It's rubbish of them to sit on it for a year and then come out with this.

[RFLH]

I thought they couldn't do retrospective? That'd mean bringing in everyone from years back wouldn't it?

[lawlessone2009]

I'm sorry L1,

I am confused

Are they threatening to use a technicality dependant on the outcome of this appeal?

I can't find any info on the Ramage appeal on-line, but I've read the Moorov document and my interpretaion of it is that it can be
brought in if there are two charges so I can't see how they can use it if there was no charge for the first FA.

It's rubbish of them to sit on it for a year and then come out with this.

It appears that it's on the outcome of the Ramage appeal. There is NO info anywhere apart from the sentencing media frenzy... The solicitor may have had a long day and dropped the wrong name but I doubt it. I checked out cases on Bailii:

http://www.bailii.org/

and couldn't find anything....... Checked on the High Court appeals info and nothing...

I think it's just an extension of playing with my mind. Make me suffer a little longer! The amount of time and resources that must have been poured into the investigation beggars belief and apparently there are HUNDREDS of me in the system just waiting, I asked!

I think it's to do with all the media stuff around historic sex allegations and present ones along with all the changes that are being proposed. There is an agenda behind all this and I am at present attempting to figure it out... As far as I am led to believe there is little chance of the prosecution/Police dropping ANYTHING at the moment, sit on it and wait. Not really the ideal way to run a judicial system but then they're all getting rich whilst the falsely accused are dwelling in the abyss.

[lawlessone2009]

I thought they couldn't do retrospective? That'd mean bringing in everyone from years back wouldn't it?

So did I...

I don't think it's to be truly retrospective but more encompassing 'open' cases at the time of the trial/appeal. That's the only interpretation that I can get my head round!

Maybe it's a new 'alteration'?

[lawlessone2009]

Formal Notice arrived today...

No further proceedings at this time...

If in future I am naughty OR the law changes then they will reconsider their position...............

[Casehardened]

So are you looking for some more bananas? Oh all right then....

[So angry and hurt]

So hurt and angry

Oh yes! I should think so too , happy Christmas ,the biggest present of all , great news for all of us following your story . I am so pleased for you.
Do you watch "the strongest man competition " we'll you can be the winner .......and your prize is ::

[lonley place]

Wow, its good to hear positive news again, Congratulations !!!!
LP

[Boys don't cry]

Just one from me because you are getting greedy

Take care and enjoy xmas.

[Izzy]

Formal Notice arrived today...

No further proceedings at this time...

If in future I am naughty OR the law changes then they will reconsider their position...............

Good you got something in writing.. something else though their wording.. blooming awful

Am happy for you L1, I hope you have a lovely Christmas, have some banana's

[lawlessone2009]

Thanks everyone, again.

As BDC points out, I'm getting greedy for those bananas!

Not intentional, just a screwed up ending!

Quite a little Christmas treat but it's by no means over.

[Boys don't cry]

If these fruits can comfort you,I'll have a ship sent to your adress for xmas.
I was surprised to read "at this time" and once again thought this was unfair.

I do understand how you feel and this is still recent but you must try to relax at least for a few weeks.
Take care and enjoy the festivities.