Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Hail the Tripod

Declared Guilty Of Sex Crimes Despite Seemingly Insufficient Evidence

Recommended Posts

A thread for collecting stories where people are convicted in court/court of public opinion without any real evidence being presented. Maybe this has always happened but before Jimmy Saville was recast as a pantomime baddie and the Rolf Harris "trial", I hadn't really noticed how bad it had got. There have been a few cases highlighted on here, Ched Evans particularly, so I thought a thread to post some of the worst outcomes for people on very little tangible evidence might prove to be both interesting and shocking.

I thought a judge publicly branding this guy an incestuous paedophile murderer without a criminal trial (and while acknowledging there's not anywhere near sufficient evidence) about as terrible as it gets.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-35359919

The criminal investigation into a father found to have sexually assaulted his 13-month-old daughter shortly before her sudden death must be reopened, an ex-justice minister says.

Paul Worthington - on the balance of probabilities - carried out a "penetrative" attack on his daughter Poppi, a family court judge ruled.

"If the justice system is about not just justice for the deceased but to make sure that the welfare of the children who are still alive is best looked after, then it must be in the interests of justice that there is a review now as to whether there was any criminal liability for anything that led to the death of this poor little child."

Mr Worthington, 48, denies any wrongdoing.

Poppi collapsed with serious injuries at her home in Barrow, Cumbria, in December 2012 and was taken to hospital where she was pronounced dead.

Cumbria Police conducted no "real" investigation for nine months, High Court family judge Mr Justice Peter Jackson found, as senior detectives thought a pathologist "may have jumped to conclusions" in her belief the child had been a victim of abuse.

The toddler was buried in February 2013, precluding a further post-mortem examination, after her body was released by the local coroner.

There is now said to be an "absence of evidence" to find out how Poppi died, or definitively prove if or how she was injured.

The death of the toddler had been shrouded in secrecy, with a 2014 fact-finding civil court judgement being kept private so as not to prejudice any criminal proceedings.

Last month, three medical experts gave evidence in open court stating they disagreed with the findings of Home Office pathologist Dr Alison Armour, who believed Poppi was the victim of "a penetrative sexual assault".

Mr Worthington was arrested in August 2013 and questioned on suspicion of sexual assault but was not charged with any offence.

The Crown Prosecution Service has previously said it conducted "a thorough review of the evidence" but decided it was insufficient to provide a realistic prospect of conviction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

home office trumps all other experts...it has to be so, otherwise, why would the home office need their own expert?

I understand the Family Court is a travesty of judges rules themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did see his picture published on the front news page of the Sun.

If he didn't do it (and I have no idea) then on the whim of some legals and the press his whole life is doubly ruined, once for the life of his daughter being lost and once for being branded her rapist and killer.

Grind up another victim in the wheels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We live in a crazy world.

We don't investigate the deed, but whenever we like we'll just name and shame without a trial. Given the nature of the alleged crimes this is judge-jury-executioner in action.

Frankly it was the same for Janner - they didn't investigate when he was alive, but now he is dead they are shoving out the stories as though he was guilty. Now, he might well have been guilty - but that isn't the job of the media to decide.

I'm sure this is a smoke-and-mirrors for the fact that investigations into those still alive are being squashed (especially senior establishment figures, rather than those poor celebrity figures who are guilty of wandering hands, and while it might be reprehensible, is only what was happening in factories and offices around the country in those days, let alone what was going on in pubs and nightclubs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We live in a crazy world.

We don't investigate the deed, but whenever we like we'll just name and shame without a trial. Given the nature of the alleged crimes this is judge-jury-executioner in action.

Frankly it was the same for Janner - they didn't investigate when he was alive, but now he is dead they are shoving out the stories as though he was guilty. Now, he might well have been guilty - but that isn't the job of the media to decide.

I'm sure this is a smoke-and-mirrors for the fact that investigations into those still alive are being squashed (especially senior establishment figures, rather than those poor celebrity figures who are guilty of wandering hands, and while it might be reprehensible, is only what was happening in factories and offices around the country in those days, let alone what was going on in pubs and nightclubs).

Certainly with the Dave Lee Travis and Neil Fox cases. Why not lock up 20% of the male population aged that was aged 20 or over in 1975; I'm sure that a similar case can be made against all of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Paul Worthington - I don't know whether he is guilty of anything or not - however, he is now safe as houses on this allegation as he can never have a fair trial as his name has been plastered across the tv and papers.

On a side note - what are the prospects of him suing and winning? Genuine question as I'm very hazy on this area of law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know the full facts. Who are we to judge?

The judge's pronouncement in the family court was not made in a vacuum, though it may be vacuous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know the full facts. Who are we to judge?

The judge's pronouncement in the family court was not made in a vacuum, though it may be vacuous.

Well quite, that's what we have criminal courts for. Due process has been completely circumvented, and this guy's life is effectively destroyed as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another case of police / social services incompetence.

Who knows what happened, but the father will always rightly be able to say he never received a fair trial (he hasn't even been charged with anything, yet his photo is all over the media).

The first paragraph of the linked article says it all:

"A criminal investigation into a father found to have sexually assaulted his 13-month-old daughter shortly before her sudden death must be reopened, an ex-justice minister says."

The paragraph says he did it (a father found to have sexually assaulted his 13-month-old daughter), but goes on to say there needs to be an investigation (yet the reporter already decided what happened). How does the BBC actually get away with this??!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another case of police / social services incompetence.

Who knows what happened, but the father will always rightly be able to say he never received a fair trial (he hasn't even been charged with anything, yet his photo is all over the media).

The first paragraph of the linked article says it all:

"A criminal investigation into a father found to have sexually assaulted his 13-month-old daughter shortly before her sudden death must be reopened, an ex-justice minister says."

The paragraph says he did it (a father found to have sexually assaulted his 13-month-old daughter), but goes on to say there needs to be an investigation (yet the reporter already decided what happened). How does the BBC actually get away with this??!!

Hopefully he gets a very good lawyer and sues all of these media outlets for a fortune for destroying his life.

It's the only thing that will make them behave responsibly.

I don't think it passes through their minds that he could be entiely innocent so if this has happened to him it might happen to them also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Certainly with the Dave Lee Travis and Neil Fox cases. Why not lock up 20% of the male population aged that was aged 20 or over in 1975; I'm sure that a similar case can be made against all of them?

 

20% of the male population ? What about the burds...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is appalling, although not surprising from a familly court judge, the family courts being a bastion of secrecy, injustice, downright hypocrisy and corruption.

I believe the judge made the statement after a Finding of Fact (ha) hearing - a hearing specifically on certain details in the family court arena. Of course, a finding of fact may find something to have happened ... even though it hasn't (and vice versa) as the burden of proof is on the balance of probabilities, unlike the criminal courts.

Quite disgraceful behaviour by the judge.

If he's guilty, fine - let the criminal courts do their thing. It looks like it's all been f*cked up by the usual morons (police / SS / children's services).

This guy will no doubt be unable to get a fair trial so any criminal proceedings are unlikely.

In the middle of all of this a young child lost her life. F*cking tragic beyond imagination.

Everyone involved in this mess should hang their heads in shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting topic. After Janner died, I was thinking myself of starting a "Jimmy Savile - trial of the facts?" thread.

While Rolf may well be an habitual groper, I believe he was stitched-up based on the facts presented in court.

But at least it got to court.

Savile now occupies the unchallenged position of Historic Paedo-in-Chief based on ... ? anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another case of police / social services incompetence.

Who knows what happened, but the father will always rightly be able to say he never received a fair trial (he hasn't even been charged with anything, yet his photo is all over the media).

The first paragraph of the linked article says it all:

"A criminal investigation into a father found to have sexually assaulted his 13-month-old daughter shortly before her sudden death must be reopened, an ex-justice minister says."

The paragraph says he did it (a father found to have sexually assaulted his 13-month-old daughter), but goes on to say there needs to be an investigation (yet the reporter already decided what happened). How does the BBC actually get away with this??!!

If that blatant assertion in the media is not good grounds for legal action by the bloke I dont know what is!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On a side note - what are the prospects of him suing and winning? Genuine question as I'm very hazy on this area of law

If it was said by a judge in court, no chance. There's something called "judicial immunity" that puts our judiciary unconditionally above the law, no matter how stupid or corrupt. Indeed, the fact corruption cannot be challenged is surely one of the key reasons our judiciary in this country is the heart of corruption that in other countries (with different power structures) might instead be found in politicians or officials.

Interesting topic. After Janner died, I was thinking myself of starting a "Jimmy Savile - trial of the facts?" thread.

While Rolf may well be an habitual groper, I believe he was stitched-up based on the facts presented in court.

But at least it got to court.

Savile now occupies the unchallenged position of Historic Paedo-in-Chief based on ... ? anyone?

Was Janner the chap who committed suicide after having his life ruined? Why don't the Chattering Classes speak of him as a victim in exactly the same way as Turing?

As regards Savile, if TPTB were remotely interested in the truth about him they would at the very least have ruled out financial reward for his accusers. He can't be put on trial, and any finding against him is now hopelessly prejudiced. You might like this little ramble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was Janner the chap who committed suicide after having his life ruined?

No Greville Janner was the Alzheimer's sufferer who wasn't actually faking it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   90 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.