1 of 196
Statute of limitation
| |||||||
11:54 (15 minutes ago)
| | ||
As my MP., I should like you to look at what seem to be gross miscarriages of justice in this country.
It seems that since the Savile affair started, people are now, after many years, coming forward to allege "Abuse" in their past.
It seems though that the CPS is actually prosecuting those alleged "Abusers" with no actual corroborated evidence other than the fading memories of those allegedly abused. Seemingly, as long as there are more than one abused, telling a similar tale, the prosecution has more chance of success. This means that the accused person, (usually male) has to PROVE his innocence, rather than (as our laws currently stand) having the prosecution prove guilt.
It also means that appeals against punishing sentences which demand evidence, may not be considered.
It is now the case that one is now guilty unless proved innocent, not the other way round as in almost all civilised countries.
I put it to you, and all those in the judiciary, that there are innocent, elderly men incarcerated in jail, who are the victims of vengeance, or victims of those wishing to to fatten their bank balances, with "Compensation".
It IS a fact that recently, Germany, not usually a country one associates with human rights, abolished financial compensation in abuse case; they now report that claims of sexual abuse dropped by almost 70% since that became law. This should tell us something about the sort of people now coming forward in this country; we cannot be much different from the Germans.
The CPS "Code for Prosecutors" is that first there should be 'sufficient evidence' for charging a suspect, and that prosecution should be in the public interest.
But we have recently seen one 78 years old man extradited from Australia, where he had been living a married life for decades.
He faced charges going back to (would you believe) 1949!! It seems that one of the elderly women he had purportedly abused decades ago, couldn't even remember the dates that this abuse occurred; scandalous!
Where is the "public interest" to prosecute an old man with a walking-stick and wearing a hearing-aid? Where also is the "public interest" in prosecuting anyone for alleged crime(s) committed so long ago?
The UK is alone in Europe, and the USA in not having a Statute of Limitations on the length of time that a "Crime" can be pursued... any crime, not just abuse cases. The USA for instance considers that 20 years for some cases and twelve for others is an adequate time for someone to come forward to report a crime, however, the UK has an over bloated child protection industry bigger than that of even than the US., with an estimated two-million employees, all with a vested interest in maintaining the current status quo: there would undoubtedly be an outcry if any government tried to get with the rest of the civilised world, and bring in a Statute of Limitations. I think that there would be more support for that, and not from the obvious quarters, but also from the legal profession.
In the long run, though I think that there maybe a case to answer in the ECHR, article 6, the right to a fair trial. No trial is fair where there is no evidence to corroborate a statement.
I past a URL here, from the "opinion site.org" which outlines the current situation, and what can be done about it. There are some interesting observations in the forum at the end of the site post. Millions arte looking at this site, and it is safe to do so.
