Penniless and Lonely

[Franticwithworry]

Oops! I'd forgotten that he was in NI. Sorry.

[Peter1975]

I've just heard back from our NI pafaa member. Her OH was interviewed March 2016, charged October 2016 and trial was in May 2017 so it seems that the wheels of justice turn just as slowly in NI as they do in E&W.

As frantic says, you will be glad of the delay and the preparation time should there be a charge although it may not feel like it at the moment.

Hang in there Pond.

[Pond31]

The problem is that I want to tell them they are all wasting their time and tax payers money but they don't care.

[Rights Fighter]

Am I right in thinking that Pond already has a solicitor he trusts?

[Pond31]

Am I right in thinking that Pond already has a solicitor he trusts?

Yes I have Charlene Dempsey of HHD. Recommended by fellow members and I agree.

btw when this is all over, as you say, suing the PPS and PSNI may not work. I am considering speaking to the MLA's again to get them to change the law. I would like to see set time limits on investigations such as 6 months and any time over that has to be agreed by a judge. Also the PPS will have 1 month to decided to charge or not, again if they want more it has to be agreed by a judge. I have already spoken to some of them and they all were sympathetic about waiting months for decisions and delays due to typing statements. I told them what I was arrested for because I am not going to hide.

I am going to phone the PPS later to see what is happening and I bet my case has not been allocated yet.

[Rights Fighter]

Oh that's good. I couldn't remember whether I had suggested her to you - seems I must have done. Barrister Mark Barlow is the bees knees.

Hopefully he will be available should you be charged. He says it "as it is" and does not mislead, plus he listens to this clients.

[kkkkkk]

I AM VERRY SORRY IF THIS HAS BEEN POSTED ALREADY

There is actually a St Vincent's de paul in England

https://st-helens-merseyside.cylex-u...-14627767.html

I was actually looking for an rbs atm and instead found this, crazy mad

[for clarity this helpful reply should be read in conjunction with posts #7 > #14 on page 1 of this thread; CH]

[Rights Fighter]

Not quite with you kkkk

How does this relate to Pond's thread? I had a long night so maybe I've missed something


Big apologies kkkk!

Just realised St Vincent de Paul was mentioned in May this year. I think that Pond has since moved forward - but that you so much for providing the link as others might be able to make use of it

[Pond31]

Ha I owe meself a £10

Ha I owe meself (myself in NI) a £10 as I phoned the PPS (CPS for NI) and they have yet to allocate the case to anyone after 25 days. Oh joy this justice at its finest.

btw stick your money on McGregor winning the fight with a KO in the seventh round.

[Pond31]

Tell me it is a bad idea

Ok I am writing this because I want someone to tell me that it is a bad idea. I was wondering if I am eventually charged, will the police come and search my house and remove my computer equipment phone etc. I am asking because I am tempted to just buy some stuff and hide it around the house just to freak them out. Devil Worshiping stuff. Large Bags of white powder and green plant material among others stuff. They then can waste their time testing the stuff or wondering WTF I am up too.

I know if the back of my mind it is a bad idea but unfortunately my sense of humor is a bit wacky at the moment.

[Franticwithworry]

It's a bad idea. The havoc that would likely rain down on your head doesn't bear thinking about and isn't funny, tempting as the idea might be.

Dont do it.

Don't even think about it.

[Peter1975]

A very bad idea.

If they wanted any of your stuff they would have taken it or asked for it when they arrested/questioned you. They won't be coming for your devices unless new evidence suggests they need to but it would be a bit pointless given how much time you have had to dispose of anything incriminating.

[Pond31]

I don't think the PPS are used to the (falsely) accused phoning up for updates, as they seem to be shocked every time I do. I phoned them again today and ask if my case had been allocated to anyone. The PPS said no and that due to "holidays" etc it may not be allocated to someone for another month. So it takes two months for a case to be allocated!!! Not even worked on. I don't find this acceptable. If you are wondering why I am keeping in contact with the PPS is that I can build up a timeline to take to my local MLA's and ask them to change the law.

[Pond31]

Statements are not enough for Prima Facie evidence and Probable Cause?

I am going to ask a few questions and make a few lay person comments here based only on a cursory examination of the law and definitions, so please don't laugh to much if I have mis-understood anything.

I cannot understand how a case can be started if the only evidence is the statement of the FA. How can the police accept the words of a FA as Prima Facie evidence of a crime without any actually witnesses or physical evidence. It appears to me that the Accused saying it didn't happen has equal legal value to the FA saying it did. Where are the provable facts in this scenario?

Lord Hoffman stated "If a legal rule requires a fact to be proved (a 'fact in issue'), a judge or jury must decide whether or not it happened. There is no room for a finding that it might have happened. The law operates a binary system in which the only values are 0 and 1." If there is no evidence to support the belief that statements of the FA are actually Facts and it is a case of "he said she said", then where is the balance of proof to give the police the Probable Cause they need. How can the police justify sending the paperwork to the CPS/PPS and then how can they then justify taking a case to trial. In this scenario, the only thing that they can be judged is the quality of the Accused and FA's statements. This "quality" is subjective and therefore should not be held to be a Fact. Should the accused statement be mistrusted because they are nervous and fidgety, while they are in the police station or dock? On the other hand should the FA statement be trusted because they are presenting themselves as a "poor me" victim? As a lay person, it appears to me that in my scenario there is no evidence of Fact only the subjective judgement of the Probability of something happening or not. It particularly confuses me how people are found guilty of historical offences. I sincerely want to know how this is possible with no evidence other than statements.

It is just so frustrating that the legal system is biased against the accused in rape cases. The current policy of automatically calling FA's victims and NOW allowing them to give video statements appears to me to clearly bias an investigation. Investigations should independent and unbiased. The should be no automatic "believing" off any side. Evidence should be gathered and charges laid if it supports doing so. The Police and CPS/PPS should not be swayed by the emotive subject matter of any case. It would seem to me, as lay person, that the instructions of current justice minister on how to handle rape and sexual assault case appear to ride roughshod through the belief of "innocent before being proven guilty". I would love to see if it could be argued that her actions are illegal as they do not appear to be conducive to a "fair trial".

I have more questions to ask and opinions to voice but don't want to go on to much or appear more wrong then I need be.

[Franticwithworry]

The statement of the Complainant is considered evidence on its own because sexual allegations, particularly historic ones, have no forensic evidence. In the push to be seen a tough on sexual crime, and given the policy of believing the Complainant no matter what, the drive for convictions rather than justice for all has skewed the system.

You hit the nail on the head as to how it 'should' be, but an increasing number are realising that the pendulum has swung too far in the favour of Complainant's, opening the door for malicious and false allegations, resulting in misery for many and wrongful convictions for a growing few. The police are required to pass sexual crime to the CPS for decisions and the CPS hides behind 'let a jury decide'. They make their decision based on their percieved likelihood of a conviction when they don't have much defence information either, high doesn't help.

The levels of awareness are increasing, slowly, and the pendulum will swing the other way, but not quickly enough, unfortunately, and while we have a DPP seems to believe that a huge proportion of men are unconvicted rapists and who treats women as frail creatures who are incapable of making a decision in sexual matters or of taking personal responsibility for themselves, the general public has a problem. A society where men are expected to be the arbiters of and responsible for all good sexual decisions is ridiculous, but that's the direction she is going in, whether she likes or accepts that, or not.

Trouble is, no-one has the financial resources to take the DPP or the government to task over it.