Benjamin Mendy - City lose case and Mendy awarded £11m in back pay (p168)

Brendan110_0 said:
The guy had his City career ruined by money grabbing women. I'd be pissed about it.
Click to expand...
Not quite. Injuries and loss of form did that. He'll probably be moved on now with a large settlement but this case will stick with him.
 
MarsLlama said:
From what I've seen, the people who didn't follow the trial closely tend to assume he is guilty and the people who did tend to think he is innocent.

Certainly from the info we have I don't think it's an unreasonable conclusion to reach that he didn't do it.
Click to expand...

I have to be honest. I’m a big fat fucking hypocrite when it comes to people facing sex charges.

I’m normally a big… innocent until proven guilty, kinda guy.

But when it is generally accepted that a tiny fraction of sexual assaults end up with a prosecution, I can’t help myself wondering whether they are not guilty or just got away with it in rape cases especially.

No need for anyone to call me out on it because I know it’s wrong and unfair. But I just can’t help it, knowing that so many sexual assaults don’t end up with a prosecution.
 
stonerblue said:
What other conclusion do you expect people to draw from a not guilty verdict?
Also, what civil cases are tried by jury?
Click to expand...
Some civil cases are tried by jury, but I never talked about civil juries, just the level of proof. We hear a lot about civil cases so it's not unreasonable for people to imagine trials where two people tell a story and the "winner" is the one who is believed.

As for the conclusion - the burden of proof is one way. Quite rightly, people aren't sent to prison based on a close decision. You can end a case, thinking that someone is probably guilty, but if there's doubt you don't convict them.

This isn't controversial stuff - it's quite literally what happens in a criminal case. It's tough on the defendant that the decision isn't the same as "innocent", but if the court had to prove innocence instead of guilt, they would be more likely to end up in prison, so it's ultimately to their benefit. If it meant that everyone else was lying (which was the conclusion that some have come to), then nearly every case would end with the other witnesses/victims being prosecuted. Clearly that's only happens very rarely.
 
Uncle Wally One Ball said:
It isnt. Respectfully, and Im not looking to agitate you or cause a row here, if that was your understanding of the judges direction on the law you should not have been the foreman on that jury. The confusion between the having to be absolutely certain of the victims lack of consent and the burden of proof for the defendant to be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt have been conflated there and misunderstood.

To explain that: the offence of rape is committed when
  • (A)Acts intentionally and penetrates either the mouth, anus or vagina of (B) with his penis
  • (B) does not consent to the act;
  • And (A) does not reasonably believe that B consents.
So, in order to prove that it HAS to be found that the victim did not consent, amd juries have to be absolutely certain - amd that is what the judge explained- that she did not.

It is only one part of the proof to be met. Once established, the rest is the same as any other offence and the burden of beyond reasonable doubt is as in any other case.

There is no flexibility as you describe it, it is just that with rape that are several elements to be satisfied and non consent is an absolute.

Again, not looking to cause annoyance here.
Click to expand...
No offence taken. You clearly have far greater knowledge of the Courts than I do. I can only comment given my 2 weeks experience of Jury Service. As to your remark that I should not have been foreman of the jury : if only one of my fellow jurors had been willing to offer their services ! I sat on four juries and on at least two of them my only contribution was to suggest that we might actually consider the evidence before us but was over-ruled by my fellow jurors who had trains to catch. You clearly have more faith in the Jury System than I will ever have.
Perhaps Mendy's counsel took great care to vet their Jury to the best of their ability.

As to your further remarks and the case that I was a juror on :
The young lady who was supposed to have been raped at no time ever indicated that she had been "raped" ; indeed, she seemed to consider the whole event to have been something of a lark! ( unlike the ladies in Mendy's case )
The prosecuting barrister was a young lady who appeared to be on her first case. The judge was continually pulling her up and almost "bullying" her. The whole tenor of the defense and prosecution pointed to our finding the young lad "not guilty".

A visit to Alderley Edge station on a Friday Evening might be illuminating with the arrival of the hordes of young ladies in their exotic finery. They are indeed a sight to behold !

Oh - and yes - City are well rid of Mendy .
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Just so I can get this straight, due to many different arguments, Benjamin Mendy has been found not guilty of the crimes that he was purported to have committed. Therefore, he is presumed innocent in the eyes of UK law, a system that is globally recognised as one of the best.

Personally, after reading the media, it was easy to see that he was a bit of a deviant. Following the reality that entailed, it became clear that I shouldn’t listen to the pricks that sensationalised this.

Reality strikes.
Click to expand...
A deviant? I've not followed this lavishly but if you mean he's rich (or was) and attracted a lot of ladies then I'm not sure that can be considered 'deviant'?
 

I said on here when all this shit first came out - innocent unless proven guilty.

I really feel for the kid. Been dragged through a couple of years of a nightmare for fuck all.

Glad it’s sorted now and he can crack on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.