CPS Criticised Over Historic Cases

occyoccy Posts: 65,045
Forum Member
✭✭
Crown Prosecution Service have been criticised over its decision to prosecute many well known celebrities. This all came to light after Jimmy Saville death - BBC Newsnight programme began an investigation into reports that he was a paedophile. I wonder if Saville was still alive would these cases including Bill Roache, Rolf Harris, Dave Lee Travis, Max Clifford and most recent Nigel Evans and others had been a bigger profile?

I'm just asking could these cases which the CPS ( Crown Prosecution Service ) have investigated and seen celebrities cleared of sex charges that women will be put off coming to the police. We are hearing noises from all sources -but unfortunately Saville died " It looks like we haven't got our man, so we go and find others?"

Comments

  • occyoccy Posts: 65,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    We should reveal the people who are making these allegations. Not the person who ends up in court. Historic cases going back 30 / 40 years is unbelievable
  • kippehkippeh Posts: 6,655
    Forum Member
    It's a bloody mess from top to bottom.
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    they should face criticism.

    they constantly say it was right to put the allegations before a jury. but there own guidelines say they have to have a realistic prospect of conviction.

    apparently this means over 50% chance. what is their conviction rate in this area?

    and how realistic os the prospect of conviction when the 'victim' says they don't believe there was a crime, or in the bill roache case they can't actually remember the incident.
  • occyoccy Posts: 65,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Celebrities etc have lost 100s of thousands of pounds - losing there houses etc to pay legal costs. Plus there reputation.

    CPS don't pay it back. Why should you pay court costs if your found not guilty?
  • jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It does seem the CPS have rather got carried away with this and given too little attention to the prospect of a conviction or the impact it has on the lives of those charged even when cleared.
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,603
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    Celebrities etc have lost 100s of thousands of pounds - losing there houses etc to pay legal costs. Plus there reputation.

    CPS don't pay it back. Why should you pay court costs if your found not guilty?

    I suppose the arguement would be that if the state were to re-imburse all the defendants costs then there's nothing to stop huge bills being racked up. I'm sure part of the reason for Roache/Travis/Evans's huge bills is that they engaged the very best (and so expensive) briefs they could.

    I am concerned though that the CPS seem to be taking the view that if they find enough low-level, possibly dubious, accusations that somehow the defendant becomes guilty simply by weight of numbers.
  • occyoccy Posts: 65,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The CPS will defend themselves and can't really shove them under the carpet. They say it's in the public interest. Should those who make the complaints pay for those legal costs?
  • jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,997
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    The CPS will defend themselves and can't really shove them under the carpet. They say it's in the public interest.

    They also say that when they decide not to bring a prosecution as there is little chance of a conviction.
    Should those who make the complaints pay for those legal costs?

    No, as it isn't their decision to bring a case to court.
  • flagpoleflagpole Posts: 44,641
    Forum Member
    occy wrote: »
    The CPS will defend themselves and can't really shove them under the carpet. They say it's in the public interest. Should those who make the complaints pay for those legal costs?

    Absolutely not. i assume you just haven't thought through the implications.

    imagine, say your house is burgled, the police bring the case to court, for some reason the person who did it gets off. you should pay the court fees?

    how many people would report a rape if they risked financial ruin.

    witness a murder?
  • skp20040skp20040 Posts: 66,874
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    The CPS will defend themselves and can't really shove them under the carpet. They say it's in the public interest. Should those who make the complaints pay for those legal costs?

    In general no, but if someone was found to have lied and made up accusations then if they were of sound mind at the time then yes I think they should. And in cases such as this accuser in the Roache case

    One charge was thrown out halfway through the trial – a count of indecent assault, which hinged on another woman's claim that she "believed" Roache had forced her to masturbate him in his car, but couldn't remember for sure.

    The court heard she was picked up by the actor from Granada Studios in his car and thought she had been indecently assaulted, but had "no actual memory" of the episode


    The CPS should cover any costs relating to that charge because it should never have got to court and if it had been a member of the public accused with the same evidence it would not have.
  • occyoccy Posts: 65,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The power of the Crown Prosecution Service to pursue historical allegations of sexual assault should be investigated, MP Nigel Evans has said.

    Mr Evans, who was cleared of rape and sexual assault last Thursday, said the CPS has pursued his case and a number of others because it regretted failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile.

    He called on the Home Affairs Select Committee launch a probe.

    The CPS has insisted the decision to take Mr Evans to court was correct.


    The CPS might not ask for as many cases for one person like we have seen be pursed in court in one go. We have seen many celebrities recently being investigated for upto 12 charges.
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,648
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Of course this is the CPS which was, until recently, being run by Keir Starmer who is being touted as a Labour candidate in the election.
  • academiaacademia Posts: 18,225
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    The CPS will defend themselves and can't really shove them under the carpet. They say it's in the public interest. Should those who make the complaints pay for those legal costs?

    Don't suggest that to the government. It would be a perfect way to shut down all complaints of sex crime. They have been adept at shutting down investigations of the filthiest crimes committed by their own - imposing financial penalties on complainants would end complaints completely. In whose interests would that be?
  • LateralthinkingLateralthinking Posts: 8,027
    Forum Member
    academia wrote: »
    Don't suggest that to the government. It would be a perfect way to shut down all complaints of sex crime. They have been adept at shutting down investigations of the filthiest crimes committed by their own - imposing financial penalties on complainants would end complaints completely. In whose interests would that be?

    Quite. Cyril Smith is back in the news today. How to delay action on figures in the political establishment - Strategy 1 - Concentrate on celebrities; Strategy 2 - When that fails, go back to dead people. The post Evans stances on CPS, if and when they lead to a clampdown, will be the modern equivalent to bodies being chucked off Morning Cloud.
  • allaortaallaorta Posts: 19,050
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Quite. Cyril Smith is back in the news today. How to delay action on figures in the political establishment - Strategy 1 - Concentrate on celebrities; Strategy 2 - When that fails, go back to dead people. The post Evans stances on CPS, if and when they lead to a clampdown, will be the modern equivalent to bodies being chucked off Morning Cloud.

    Many a word...............................
  • occyoccy Posts: 65,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Saville and Cyril Smiith another one that got away. So now the CPS havn't got there men they want something.
  • allaortaallaorta Posts: 19,050
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    Saville and Cyril Smiith another one that got away. So now the CPS havn't got there men they want something.

    They got away withit because of corruption in high and very high places. Apart from looking at those who suffered at the hands of Savile and Smith, I'd be taking a very close look at the establishment that not only did nothing but in some cases both supported and participated.
  • AxtolAxtol Posts: 8,480
    Forum Member
    I did feel quite sorry for celebrities for a while knowing that it would only take one person with a grudge to potentially destroy their image and that loads of people would probably assume guilt right away.
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CPS Criticised For Not Prosecuting Politician*

    *if things had gone differently
  • occyoccy Posts: 65,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    On going cases which we are seeing / hearing celebrities rearrested. I wonder "If they are cleared will Alison Saunders, head of the CPS, still claim it's 'in the public interest' whilst the public purse funds it?
  • paul2307paul2307 Posts: 8,079
    Forum Member
    occy wrote: »
    On going cases which we are seeing / hearing celebrities rearrested. I wonder "If they are cleared will Alison Saunders, head of the CPS, still claim it's 'in the public interest' whilst the public purse funds it?

    They are having a second try on DLT and have come up with new charges , makes you wonder how thorough the original investigation was
Sign In or Register to comment.