Dispatches/Sunday Times investigation: Russell Brand accused of rape and sexual assault

[mancity2012_eamo]

I haven’t read your opinion on Brand mate so can’t comment on your position but I’ve explained my reasoning to Chicago Blue. However I’m interested in what you’ve said about the legal standing of rape cases.

The CPS has raised the bar on evidence based cases they take to court pretty gradually since they came to power (in the late 80s I think it was). last year we had a 5% conviction rate on ALL reported crimes. Less than 2% for rape cases. Personally I think the police and CPS are failing the UK but that’s perhaps an argument for another time and a lot of the CPS’ decision making comes down to money and resources (or lack of).

Out of interest why do you feel the law should have such a high reasoning of proof in regard to sexual assaults and rapes? From my knowledge false accusations are nominal when compared to actual cases of abuse that don’t get taken forward? That’s my understanding from what I’ve read but hands up I have no first hand knowledge of this particular area so keen to hear why you - someone who works in the courts by the sounds of it - feels it’s so important that there is a higher level of proof required? And by that do you mean higher than say murder or GBH? What other crimes are you comparing that to?

No I don’t distinguish between sexual assault or any other criminal cases when I talk about the law in general.
That’s why I say I understand or support the reasoning behind having the standard of proof bar so high.
Reasonable doubt is not an impossible standard to reach but it is high.
If a case is taken to a criminal court then the prosecution should have evidence they feel is convincing enough to get a conviction.
I appreciate the difficulties and the delicacies around cases of this nature, but unless you want the law written differently for rape, like how I outlined to another poster, for defamation, then that is the framework you are operating in.

Anecdotal I know, but what I see of what passes through the CCJ over here, I would say there is a high success rate of prosecution of those that make it to court.

The reason I believe that conviction in a court of law is the best justice for these victims, is it gives closure. The relief to the victims and jury alike at the end of these trials is tangible.

 

[snorky]

I can only comment on what I read…as is the case for anyone without firsthand knowledge.

All I know is that the British media are the worst purveyors of crap and he’s the current target.

If he is a rapist, I hope he’s sent down.

I’m very interested by your confidence in your knowledge of the FACTS with the comment “when it all comes out.”

As they say…put up or shut up!

I am not so sure that the British gutter media are any worse than the American gutter media mate?

 

[bugsyblue]

No I don’t distinguish between sexual assault or any other criminal cases when I talk about the law in general.
That’s why I say I understand or support the reasoning behind having the standard of proof bar so high.
Reasonable doubt is not an impossible standard to reach but it is high.
If a case is taken to a criminal court then the prosecution should have evidence they feel is convincing enough to get a conviction.
I appreciate the difficulties and the delicacies around cases of this nature, but unless you want the law written differently for rape, like how I outlined to another poster, for defamation, then that is the framework you are operating in.

Anecdotal I know, but what I see of what passes through the CCJ over here, I would say there is a high success rate of prosecution of those that make it to court.

The reason I believe that conviction in a court of law is the best justice for these victims, is it gives closure. The relief to the victims and jury alike at the end of these trials is tangible.

I have no problem with reasonable doubt but I do have a problem with how the CPS decide which cases to take to trial. Their decision making in the Uk is often led by cost v conviction probability and that doesn’t best serve victims. The police are equally as frustrated too.

 

[Aba452]

There's a new panorama on Monday 02 October. Wonder which "comedians" will be dreading that one? Tbh it's probably something entirely different or unrelated.

What I will say is that Sarah Pascoe amongst many other female comedians has said there are active social media groups with LISTS of male counterparts who ARE sexual predators. That's a big stinking problem.

Guys who think they're untouchable, selecting women from the audience, no comeback. Of course fame and power do attract sexual attention, been going on forever.

The rather unlikely David Niven was a very prolific chap around Hollywood. Would he be a predator now?

Patrick Troughton as Doctor Who had a wife and three children, only took on the job to pay for his kids school fees. But he also had another "family" who he also spent a lot of time with. By all accounts he was always chatting up female guest stars.

The tabloids and social media would have had a field day with these two but equally times have changed since the 60s.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I have no problem with reasonable doubt but I do have a problem with how the CPS decide which cases to take to trial. Their decision making in the Uk is often led by cost v conviction probability and that doesn’t best serve victims. The police are equally as frustrated too.

Does that mean that you think it's a funding/staffing issue?
And that with more funding/staff, you think that more cases would be taken to court?

 

[bugsyblue]

Does that mean that you think it's a funding/staffing issue?
And that with more funding/staff, you think that more cases would be taken to court?

Absolutely part of the problem. Cases have been backed up for years, Covid didn’t help either. However the CPS make decisions based on time constraints, severity of crime, evidence and probability of a conviction. The reality is there’s a sizeable amount of cases that could probably result in the conviction that simply aren’t being taken forward that would have been, say 10-15 years ago. That’s why we are seeing such record low awful numbers of prosecutions vs charges.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Absolutely part of the problem. Cases have been backed up for years, Covid didn’t help either. However the CPS make decisions based on time constraints, severity of crime, evidence and probability of a conviction. The reality is there’s a sizeable amount of cases that could probably result in the conviction that simply aren’t being taken forward that would have been, say 10-15 years ago. That’s why we are seeing such record low awful numbers of prosecutions vs charges.

Ta - that's pretty much what I thought you meant.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

I have no problem with reasonable doubt but I do have a problem with how the CPS decide which cases to take to trial. Their decision making in the Uk is often led by cost v conviction probability and that doesn’t best serve victims. The police are equally as frustrated too.

Fair enough.
I wouldn’t claim to be any sort of expert, let alone the British Judicial System.

 

[lazerblue]

As good a thread as any I suppose. Is the world falling apart?

'Sadistic' British crocodile expert Adam Britton admits sexually abusing and killing dozens of dogs

Adam Britton's offending - which resulted in the deaths of 39 dogs - "could only be described as grotesque cruelty", a judge says. Members of the public, security staff and reporters were urged to leave the courtroom before the detailed charges were read out.

news.sky.com

jesus christ, how low can you go, a sausage dog?

 

[journolud]

There's a new panorama on Monday 02 October. Wonder which "comedians" will be dreading that one? Tbh it's probably something entirely different or unrelated.

Is it wrong to hope that it's Michael McIntyre?