Question regarding bail

[jittery]

hi

As far as i'm aware a case is classed as historical, 14days or later after the incident supposedly happened.

my FA made her claim, a week or so after it supposedly happened.

I never thought about phoning someone and asking about it.

AAhh, mine made the claim on the day the supposed crime took place, which worked massively in my favour. I was told I would hear something in 6 weeks, after 9 weeks I began to get a bit jittery so thought I'd see if I could get an independent forensic company involved.

[Rights Fighter]

I know someone who did that and they got into serious bother as the forensic company they happened to pick was the one that the CPS were using.....

You have to be so careful

[jittery]

hi

I know someone who did that and they got into serious bother as the forensic company they happened to pick was the one that the CPS were using.....

You have to be so careful

Ouch, yes of course, I hadn't considered that! Nice to have you back, good hols?

Did you bring me back a stick of Rock in the shape (and size ) of a stein?

[Feeling Low]

Yeah, i was originally given a 3 month bail. i think for a month at least nothing was done with regards my phone, as they couldn't unlock it!! I must have given them my code 4 times. lol

I eventually said to the OIC that someone should have asked me to take the code off before i handed it in. I wasn't even told they were taking it. i got my stuff handed back when i was bailed, and i asked for my phone, thats when i was told. i was still in shock from the arrest and being in a cell and the interview ... although the fact the arresting officer asked for my code should have given me a clue.

I was quite chatty to the OIC when i had to phone up, when I joined here, i kept reading 'Police are not your friends' and stuff ... I stopped being friendly then. kept chatter to a minimum.

i might be in a minority here, but i've found the OIC, to be quite friendly, and her boss to.

[Feeling Low]

I know someone who did that and they got into serious bother as the forensic company they happened to pick was the one that the CPS were using.....

You have to be so careful

Maybe I'm missing something, but surely that isn't 'that' person's fault?

[jittery]

hi

Maybe I'm missing something, but surely that isn't 'that' person's fault?

Well no, but I suppose the inference is that you're not trusting them to do their job properly?

[Feeling Low]

it never crossed my mind to do that, so i can't answer, i still have a huge amount of faith in the system and a hige amount of respect for the police in general, yes biased towards the complaintant, but thats the way our system is, there job is to gather enough evidence to prove a crime took place, not disprove it. thus they are biased towards the complaintant.

is that why you looked into a forensic company jittery?

[jittery]

hi

it never crossed my mind to do that, so i can't answer, i still have a huge amount of faith in the system and a hige amount of respect for the police in general, yes biased towards the complaintant, but thats the way our system is, there job is to gather enough evidence to prove a crime took place, not disprove it. thus they are biased towards the complaintant.

is that why you looked into a forensic company jittery?

No, I just wanted a quick answer, my plan was to see if I could get the phone back and send it off for data retrieval myself

[Feeling Low]

wait, so you where told, that because it was taking 6 weeks or more, it's not being taken very seriously? sounds like a sound plan if you needed it, I assumed because it was in police hands their was nothing you could do.

[Rights Fighter]

Maybe I'm missing something, but surely that isn't 'that' person's fault?

Since when has common sense prevailed in these cases? Let's not forget that when a father, stepfather or uncle is accused of something, the fact that they bought the complainant Christmas and birthday presents, or put credit on their mobile phone, this has been classed as "grooming".

[Feeling Low]

unfortunatly common sense goes out the window, the higher up the greasy pole you go, I would just like to point out though, that a lot of things put in place in our law system at the moment, is the result of lawyers finding loopholes within current legislation and using loopholes, not always a bad thing im sure, but quite often it is. i'm not by any means saying that lawyers are too blame. i rather like lawyers, as long as im on their good side lol

I always remember a farmer was sued because he shot a burglar in his own house, and as far as im aware the burglar won on the grounds of 'lost income'. those sort of thing make the legal system a joke, kudos to the lawyer making it stick, in relation to your 'grooming' scenario, in my own lack of knowledge way, a Lawyer throw it out there, a jury or judge believed it and thus ... here we are, topping up ur kids mobile is 'grooming'

EDIT: just want to add NOT all lawyers are like that, there are lots of very very very good lawyers out there, who wouldn't do that, im sure.

[Feeling Low]

listen, if that post causes offence, please remove it.

[AmandaF]

FL- can't see anything offensive at all. And RF is once again, completely right. This is something we faced- what we thought was normal family llfe was turned into something sordid and perverse.
I struggle to hug my grandkids now, for fear someone will misintepret it.
Sad, sad times

[Rights Fighter]

listen, if that post causes offence, please remove it.

No offence taken hon

When you've been in this business as long as I have, and seen the games some barristers play (I refer to some prosecution barristers and I have one disgusting specimen in mind) then nothing will ever surprise you any more.

One such "barrister" wanted "opinion evidence" put in, where the mother of the complainant (mother was behind the allegations) said that, and I quote:

"When I confronted him with the allegations, the look on his face was 'Oh my God, I've been rumbled"'.

I use that example in my talks about false allegations to law groups, innocence projects and law schools. I say:

"Now then. How does that look go?"

And I (jokingly) invite the audience to consider how the "oh my God I've been rumbled" look, goes.....

When the judge refused that "evidence" that barrister had the temerity to accuse the trial judge of "punishing the prosecution".

You really could not make this up.

These cases are not about truth or lies. Justice. Guilt or Innocence.

It's about who can play the game the best way.

[Rights Fighter]

In the case above, prosecuting counsel had just argued successfully against the "opinion" evidence of the officer who had interviewed the complainant:

That OIC had written on the hand written notes, along the lines of: "I do not believe the allegations are true".

This was after the mother of the complainant was heard to say on the video recorded ABE interview:

"You've F****d up, I won't get my injunction now".

Once you are at trial - gone is any sense of fairness and real due process.

I have seen on these forums, where some members have complained about breaches of PACE and they have gone to a lot of trouble to copy and paste PACE and CPS guidelines here.

A few years ago those problems might have caused a trial to be "stayed" or an appeal succeed. These days lip service is paid that "yes we agree that that should not have happened" - but then the trial has continued or the appeal has failed.

Take nothing for granted. People in this situation need the right representation. It is always better to go with recommended representation on here, and in other similar groups, than be swayed by what might appear to be a "professional" website. Looks are deceiving. Read first, check the way it is written.

If a website is full of self praise, is repetitive on its many pages, and something does not really "make sense" then please be guided by your intuition. Your life can depend on this.

And of course, there are some really good legal aid solicitors and barristers out there. Regardless of what you might read, it is NOT necessary to pay out huge amounts of money to ensure a not guilty verdict. Or to quash a conviction.

If you are not eligible for legal aid, then there are some excellent private client solicitors and barristers who do not charge the earth.

Sorry, I seem to have gone off-topic! OOPS!