Nicholas rape trial outcome discussion

[Ixion]

To some measure your thoughts are addressed by the defence of "good character".

If a person (I'll assume man, though the law does not), be accused of "kiddy fiddling", one defence he may maintain is that he of a person of unblemished good character. He may bring character witnesses, he may bring evidence to show that he has himself children, that there has never been any suggestion of impropiety, that he is a pillar of the community etc. To say to the jury "How unlikely then is it that a man such as I, held in high esteem, no shadow previously having crossed my reputation, trusted by all, how improbable it must be that I would do such a thing as I am accused of".

But (I think - correction welcome) that if a defendant does maintain a defence of good character, then the prosecution may bring in evidence of previous convictions. (" The defendant claims to be of unimpeachable moral character - how then does he account for his three previous convictions of kiddy fiddling").

But the prosecution may not refer to previous transgression unless the defendant claims first that there is none.

[spudchucka]

To sum up:

1. In a trial previous behaviour is admissible evidence to challenge credibility of a witness but not of a defendant.

The exception being that if the defendant elects to present evidence of their own good charachter then the prosecution can then counter that evidence and bring up their previous offending.

[spudchucka]

Currently it's the police that have the role of deciding when to prosecute (hey we went through all this on the quad bike affair). I have to say though, I was somewhat surprised that we don't have an equivalent of the UK's Crown Prosecution Service....

We do have a crown prosecutors office. They are lawyers who are independant of the police but work for them to prosecute serious matters.

The investigating police have to get their files past the crown prosecutor before they can proceed.

[Patrick]

And who judges the Judges?? They get caught breaking the law and it gets swept under the carpet.

Know of three judges that got done for things (probably others, but three that spring to mind), an EBA guilty plea, a fraud guilty plea and his cooffender, not guilty and was found not guilty...kudos to the first two who put their hand up and said, fair cop guv. The last one... well...ummmmmmm

[spudchucka]

I disagree.

Millions of others don't. Thats why it is a basic fundamental of the justice system that a defendant needs to be tried on the facts pertaining to the current matter before the court only. Whatever crime a person has done in their life does not automatically make them guilty of a similar crime as soon as somebody accuses them of it.

From a police perspective it certainly brings them into the investigation as a suspect but they still need facts to prove the ingredients of the offence. If there are holes in the prosecution case they can't plug the holes by saying, "well he did in the past so therefore he must have done it this time too".

[Goblin]

To some measure your thoughts are addressed by the defence of "good character".

If a person (I'll assume man, though the law does not), be accused of "kiddy fiddling", one defence he may maintain is that he of a person of unblemished good character. He may bring character witnesses, he may bring evidence to show that he has himself children, that there has never been any suggestion of impropiety, that he is a pillar of the community etc. To say to the jury "How unlikely then is it that a man such as I, held in high esteem, no shadow previously having crossed my reputation, trusted by all, how improbable it must be that I would do such a thing as I am accused of".

Which imo is what these poor excuses for men have effectively done in their defence of these rape charges.(or turned it around to make it like she asked for it) Which is also why Police and Laywers, Judges etc. should be of extraordinarily high moral standard. I think greed and power tripping has alot to answer for here.

[MSTRS:Me]

I think greed and power tripping has alot to answer for here.

Gotta catch 'em first. I think they are hanging out with the other 4 horsemen....

[The Stranger:Me]

Ok is this in contrast to the police whom provide a public service by alerting the community when say a kiddy fiddler is about to be released into a community. We are usually able to mostly all agree that is a good thing.
It would appear to me that in these cases millions do.

Is there that much difference in these cases, hell the person being released isn't even a suspect in a crime and his past is dragged up.

A mate of mine was done for carnal knowledge, quite simply he was young and shall we say sexually advanced, unfortunately for him she was a little younger. No rape, no nothing, consensual but the parents got wind of it and the shit hit the fan. Now he is just a regular red blooded male. Every time for the next 20 yrs there was any crime in the area that involved a female the cops were knocking on his door. His past was certainly used then.

So which way is it?

I think there is some hypocrisy in there.

[Scouse]

You confuse freedom and irresponsibility. Freedom always carries a concomitant duty. In the case of the press, duties (inter alia) of truthfulness ; of decency; of care, public and private. And of merit, for mere titillation hath no freedom.

A free press thus bears upon its shoulders a correspondingly grave responsibility - and should be held accountable for it. The press likes on occasion to claim the title of the "fourth estate". But, so being, it must conduct itself with the sobriety and attention to public and private good that should be (but, alas, so seldom is) the nature of the other three estates.

And, it should be held accountable , before the law , for the performance of that duty.

A nation blessed with a truly free press would have no scandelsheets. For what good purpose , private or public, can they claim? Lacking the justifcation of either public or private good, they should be condemned and extinguished.

But any matter that that is of merit or which touches uopon the common weal, should be brought forward for public examination and debate. Evil always seeks the darkness- the most certain guarantee of freedom and liberty in any state is to ensure that no matter of civic comity is allowed to pass without such approbation or censure as it may merit.

Such invigilation is not incompatible with a respect for individual privacy or the (equally important) needs of justice.

Few I think could claim that the news media of our country meet such a standard

Hey Ixion could you say that in English paticularly this word "invigilation" for all us dumb bastard out here

[Goblin]

Gotta catch 'em first. I think they are hanging out with the other 4 horsemen....

Well...I'll take the high road...you take the low road & we'll ambush them at exit 69

[Ixion]

Hey Ixion could you say that in English paticularly this word "invigilation" for all us dumb bastard out here

Invigilation - sleepless watching and superintendance of those undertaking some task. Cognate of vigil. Invigilator - one who performs thus.

Commonly nowdays (but not necessarily) restricted to those who perform such tasks with regard to students sitting examinations.

[Jackrat]

Of course you have rights to express your views. But getting back to the first post in this thread, there are Court-imposed suppression orders in place in relation to the identities of some people involved in the trial. You are OK discussing any matters regarding this case as long as you don't repeat comment or speculation about protected individuals and their circumstances.

This is a private conversation amongst friends,we can discuss and say anything we like about any subject.

[Jackrat]

and they are called pigs for a reason................

Yeah thats right mate,but I bet you don't know why.
The term was first used by the police themselfs during the race riots in Watts.Watts is some black suburb in the states.One of the resident Yanks may enlighten us as to which city.
Anyway a "pig" is a device for cleaning shit out of oil rig drilling pipes.
The pigs in this case were cleaning the shit out of Watts.
Or so the story goes.

Snopes anyone??

[Winston001]

Yeah thats right mate,but I bet you don't know why.
The term was first used by the police themselfs during the race riots in Watts.Watts is some black suburb in the states.One of the resident Yanks may enlighten us as to which city.
Anyway a "pig" is a device for cleaning shit out of oil rig drilling pipes.
The pigs in this case were cleaning the shit out of Watts.
Or so the story goes.

Snopes anyone??

Watts = Los Angeles. Riots started on 11 August 1965 and lasted for 6 days. Black Panthers arose about a year later as a direct result.

[Winston001]

Not that I've had much to do with Judges but it seems to me that a lot of the old, long time judges are too well paid and so far removed from reality they have no idea what grief they cause the Police and the public with their feeble attempts at sentencing.

A common misconception. The irony is that most of the community agree with you, yet they never darken the door of a courtroom to actually see what goes on.

The fact is that judges have to deal with the dregs of society every day. And that's just the lawyers. The crims are even worse.

Judges do not sit in ivory towers. They have to listen to witnesses describing appalling situations - what do you think happens in a rape/kiddy fiddling case? The evidence is graphic and then there are the photos and medical descriptions. The public don't have any idea what goes on in a court.

For example - there is a decision in the New Zealand Law Reports which describes a man feeding his semen to a child to get her used to the taste.

Judges have a better (or worse) idea of humanity than the rest of us. But they are constrained by sentencing laws as to what they can do. And it needs to be said that imprisoning people doesn't seem to alter the crime rate.