Michael le Vell (Kevin Webster)

[nobody can eat fifty eggs]

The judge wants a unanimous verdict so I'd say he'll be propping up a bar and not sitting behind some, very soon.

It does look that way now.
I just hope he doesn't have a celebratory speech to read outside the court if he "wins" his case. I can't help myself thinking that way he would be an innocent man, but I wont help thinking that the charges were "not proven" moreso than him being totally cleared.
Mud sticks I suppose.

 

[blueian99]

The judge wants a unanimous verdict so I'd say he'll be propping up a bar and not sitting behind some, very soon.

It does look that way now.
I just hope he doesn't have a celebratory speech to read outside the court if he "wins" his case. I can't help myself thinking that way he would be an innocent man, but I wont help thinking that the charges were "not proven" moreso than him being totally cleared.
Mud sticks I suppose.

Given who most of us seem to think the accuser is, triumphalism would not be in any way an appropriate reaction.

 

[PinkFinal]

Prosecution:



The prosecutor added: "Nobody is saying (Mr Le Vell) didn't have a conscience at various stages, no one is saying he would necessarily have done this when he was sober", she added.

Referring to the alleged victim's evidence that after Mr Le Vell 'raped' her, the abuse stopped for a while, Ms Laws continued: "Isn't it interesting that after really pushing at the boundaries he stops for a while? What an interesting detail - why make it up?"

Miss Laws is arguing that the way the complainant has described the sexual acts, and her emotional responses to them, have a 'ring of truth', include the type of detail that it would be 'odd' to make up, while lacking the detail of a researched' false account.

"Was she a wicked, convincing liar, or did you sit and listen to it, even during cross-examination and think to yourself that she was telling the truth? Because that's all she can do", the barrister said.

Prosecutor Laws continued explaining how the complainant could have backed out had she not been telling the truth.

She said: "The opportunities she had were many - when she went to the GP, the police, when the CPS reviewed this case and decided that it wouldn't continue.

"She had the opportunity afterwards, as any vulnerable witness does, to say I just don't want to go ahead with it."

"Bear in mind, when it comes to deciding if this was possibly a lie, what she has put herself through over a long period of time - not just telling people, not just telling police, but a physically intimate examination - she has remained hell bent on his downfall.

"What has she got to gain? Absolutely nothing, unless it's the truth and that is what she wants to tell you. If you are sure that she is telling the truth and that she wasn't lying and there's no possibility she was lying it would be your duty to mark the courage from that witness box, to give evidence to you in the face if everything in this trial, to mark her courage with convictions."

Defence:



"It's a strange case of rape with no blood, no semen, no injury, no trace - almost, you may think, as if it didn't happen," Coronation Street actor Michael Le Vell's barrister has told court.

Alisdair Williamson,defending, is arguing that the alleged complainant has given different versions of events to different people. He told the jury, that if they were to return a guilty verdict 'you are going to take a man's life away from him, you're going to cast him into the outer darkness of being a child rapist, if you are sure.'

Speaking of the complainant's account, he added: "Where's the consistency? Not there, I suggest, simply not there....there's an agonising lack of detail from this witness. She can't give you details because it didn't happen. That is why her story varies according to who she is talking to."


Mr Williamson continued in his closing speech: "There isn't for instance any child porn on the computer. There is no evidence from other mothers saying 'I'm concerned about leaving my daughter with Michael, there's something that made me feel a bit uneasy'...the sort of evidence these courts hear all the time, nothing, not a trace, not a drop of blood, not a funny look, not a picture of a scantily-clad child on a computer, nothing to support (the complainant's) inconsistent, incoherent and unbelievable account"


Mr Williamson said: "He is a man, not a character, a weak man, a stupid man, a drunk man, but nothing in this case has taken you anywhere near the level of certainty that you would need so that you can look in the mirror in the days that come and say, 'I was sure'. Without forensic evidence, without blood, without injury, without consistency, 'I was sure'. I suggest you can't be. On each of these counts the only fair verdict the only right thing to do, is 'not guilty'."


Both have very very good arguments, how do you decide?

Interesting article:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/csa_myths.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/csa_myths.html</a>

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

I find the whole subject of rape extremely hard to deal with as I lost a very good and decent friend because of a rape accusation. i've touched on it before in another thread but a lad I went to school with, gets dragged out of his workplace infront of everyone as his ex accused him of raping her when they had just split up.

Now, from the get go I believed him but many of our friend group didn't and turned on him, as did some members of his family. He got found guilty in court and sent down. He lasted 10 months in prison, his appeal wasn't successful, he took his life a week after as he couldn't face people thinking so badly of him, i've seen the letter he left for his mum and dad and his ex who made the allegations.

A year or so after his death the same girl who I also went to school with cried rape again, this girl wasn't the cleverest and on a drunken night out laughed about what had happened to my mate Sam and this other lad, explaining she made the whole thing up for attention, failing to realise she was chatting a copper up who was on a night out.

She is now in prison for perverting the course of justice, she got 15 months..

Not the same as a suspected pedophile but I will always be wary of knowing all facts before making a decision about anyones guilt.

That story you relate is spine chillingly sad and upsetting that this can happen to an innocent lad in the 21st Century.

Poor old Timothy Evans was wrongfully hung in 1950 for a murder he did not commit. He was only 17 and although pardoned (posthumously) if he had lived he may still been alive aged 80, enjoyed family, kids grand kids great grand kids and all the other things I and assume everyone else take for granted.

As I've stated in another thread it's better that 100 guilty men walk free, than one innocent man be convicted, I think that was a quote by Churchill or someone back in the day.

 

[Benarbia_is_god]

Should a not guilty verdict be given will all the details of the case be revealed to the press? It's a bit of a farce at the moment as most know what the law has tried to keep away from the public regarding this case but twitter and the internet is a law upon itself.

Is anonymity taken away with a not guilty verdict?

 

[wayne71]

I know nothing about this trial other than the bits I've read on here so even though everyone seems to know who the alleged victim is I honestly don't but what has she got to gain from going through with these allegations?

 

[Dubai Blue]

Should a not guilty verdict be given will all the details of the case be revealed to the press? It's a bit of a farce at the moment as most know what the law has tried to keep away from the public regarding this case but twitter and the internet is a law upon itself.

Is anonymity taken away with a not guilty verdict?

No

 

[Bill]

I cant see him doing it,I just cant. Apart from it be inhumane why would he risk sticking around when charges were dropped two years ago.
you'd say fuck me that was close I'm off to Brazil or somewhere wouldn't you.

 

[tidyman]

I cant see him doing it,I just cant. Apart from it be inhumane why would he risk sticking around when charges were dropped two years ago.
you'd say fuck me that was close I'm off to Brazil or somewhere wouldn't you.

If he is guilty, I'd imagine having the charges dropped would give him the confidence to assume he had got away with it.

Fucking off immediately afterwards would be the equivilant of writing a confession that he was guilty after all.

 

[Bill]

I cant see him doing it,I just cant. Apart from it be inhumane why would he risk sticking around when charges were dropped two years ago.
you'd say fuck me that was close I'm off to Brazil or somewhere wouldn't you.

If he is guilty, I'd imagine having the charges dropped would give him the confidence to assume he had got away with it.

Fucking off immediately afterwards would be the equivilant of writing a confession that he was guilty after all.

Yeh but he could cite a "mud sticks" jobby and do one. Just find it odd.