[Misc] Caroline Flack

[OzMike]

Clueless.

I think a diffetent prospective would be more acurate, though you are obviously always right.

 

[whosthedaddy]

As has been openly and honestly discussed over many posts on here and in some cases actually seen in print, mental health, human psychology or wellbeing can be very fragile.

Wellbeing consists of many factors including positive relationships with others, personal mastery, autonomy, a feeling of purpose and a meaning in life. Depression, Anxiety, and dark thoughts can be brought to the fore by careless words and/or actions, think carefully before you post, speak or react.

People like to blame the press, social media and the like but we are ALL responsible for the way we conduct ourselves #bekind

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/flacks-law ...now up to 655k signatures, this debate needs to be had.

 

[junior]

When you have medical treatment, the staff are obliged to ask how you came by your injuries. He didn't want to press charges, but the police/CPS are ordered by the government to get as many domestic violence convictions as possible as it looks good on their figures, so will go ahead with cases with or without the victim's consent.

I see where you are coming from, but that's not accurate. I'm not aware of any orders by government to the police to get DV convictions. I don't see what the government would get from this. What will have been ordered, in one way or another, is that there must be no deaths as a result of public services not protecting people whe they had the opportunity.

I don't know the exact details of what has gone on in this case, but i do have enough knowledge to have a good go at reading between the lines, but my thoughts are based on what i've read in the media.

It's reported that Flack assaulted her partner with a lamp whilst her was sleeping. I've seen it suggested this was as a result of him texting others girls (irrelevant as no justification for assault). I've read that she received cuts to her wrist as a result of a glass being smashed. I've read that when police initially attended she made some sort of admission of guilt. I've also seen it reported that police that responded have made reference to the crime scene being like something from a horror movie, although admittedly i don't recall the exact wording used.

I don't know if it was her partner that called police after the assault. Because of the info about the cut wrists and things I've read since her death that she has previously self-harmed, it's possible on this occasion SHE has needed an ambulance and then the ambulance service have called the police when they found out about the assault, which is thier policy and common. So it is not necessarily a given that her partner called police on her.

The police that attended would have Body Worn Videos activated. From thier arrival, what these cameras capture can be evidential, although admissions or offenders comments before being arrested and cautioned would not hold as much weight as those after arrest. Either way, if she did admit assaulting him, as has been suggested, this admission will be on camera.

It is widely reported that the boyfriend 'has not pressed charges'. It doesn't quite work like that and is lazy journalism or people watching too much crime drama. The police would make the decision to arrest at a DV incident like this, they have no choice, even if the victim says they do not want the perpatrator arrested. The reasons why should be obvious. The police will then investigate and gather the intelligence and then pass that to the CPS. In a DV investigation the police cannot make a charging decision, it has to be CPS. So any comments about the boyfriend or the police pressing charges is fake news.

So she is now in police custody and they have 24hrs to gather the evidence. What evidence do they have to pass to the CPS? Normally they key evidence would be the victims statement. I think this is what people mean by saying pressing or dropping charges. If a victim gives a statement that is evidential and means they must also be prepared to stand up in court and give that evidence. Giving a statement is classed as 'supporting the police in a prosecution' and refusing or declining is classed as 'not supporting the prosecution'. They boyfriend may have told police what happened, either when he rang 999 needing help, or when police arrived, but he may still have declined to give a formal statment. He may also have given one, but then on reflection decided to retract it, something that is also quite common.

In most cases with the victim not supporting prosecution, the investigation would result in No Further Action, sometimes lazily referred to as 'charges dropped'. However in DV cases sometimes the CPS will decide to pursue a victimless prosecution. Why? It's usually because they feel that that victim needs safeguarding, or they feel they are at risk of further harm in the future and dont want to be criticised for not doing anything when they had the chance should something more serious happen in the future. That has happened in the past. Victims of domestic violence have died and authorities been blamed for not taking action against perpatrators when they had a chance to.

On this occasion they have decided to seek a victimless prosecution. I promise you that the CPS will not put anything in front of a court unless there is a realistic chance of a prosecution. Therefore without the victim giving a statement they must be in possession of enough other evidence for them to feel a conviction is likely. What could that evidence be? Well there is a recording of the 999 call to police, this can be very good evidence. There will be statements from the police officers who attended saying what they saw, thought and what was said to them, and there is also their body camera footage. As i said earlier, I'm sure I've read somewhere that Flack at first admitted to police what she had done. Her police interview would be evidence. This could be where she admitted what she did, but it's more likely that with a solicitor present she was advised to make no comment to any questions. There could also be witness statements, either from anybody who saw it happen, but don't forget neigbours could give statements to say what they heard. You'd be amazed what can be heard through a wall. There may also be evidence from the ambulance crew that attended, medical evidence and photos of injuries. There could also be a history of other incidents that have not been reported or picked up on before. With all or some of that there is a decent chance of prosecution and i would expect the CPS decision to charge, which seems to be what has happened. They won't charge without any evidence.

There has already been a first hearing at court. Some of that evidence would have already been heard and is why stuff is already in the public domain and being reported, although admittedly there is probably some innacurate info out there too.

Domestic violence is a very serious issue that effects more people that some would think. It effects all genders and all ages. I see this every day, and in this case it is sad to see some of the comments made by individuals showing attitudes such as 'hes a grass'. I've also seen numerous people question why the CPS are persisting with this when the boyfrind has 'dropped the charges'. I hope my above information answers this sort of comment. What is clear from things ive read since her death, is that people still hold attitudes that domestic violence is awful when men beat up women, but when women beat men its not really that serious and if he is not bothered or blinded by love, why does anybody else care and want to end the violence? Or that because she was attractive and her tv shows were popular, we assume that things cant be so bad and it must be the media making a big deal about it. I've even read something suggesting her death is the CPS's fault and they should be ashamed.

Now with ALL of that said, it is terribly sad that this girl has felt she needed to take her life. Mental health is a serious an issue as domestic violence and both can lead to loss of life. She could have gone to court and been found to be not guilty, and at the time of her death she was innocent. She was clearly a troubled individual and i hope she is now at peace.

 

[Chicken Run]

As has been openly and honestly discussed over many posts on here and in some cases actually seen in print, mental health, human psychology or wellbeing can be very fragile.

Wellbeing consists of many factors including positive relationships with others, personal mastery, autonomy, a feeling of purpose and a meaning in life. Depression, Anxiety, and dark thoughts can be brought to the fore by careless words and/or actions, think carefully before you post, speak or react.

People like to blame the press, social media and the like but we are ALL responsible for the way we conduct ourselves #bekind

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/flacks-law ...now up to 655k signatures, this debate needs to be had.

A lot of people wear their fragility on their online sleeve which of course is bait to trolls, maybe not airing some of life’s worries online will reduce trolling and maybe entice real talk with real people and maybe even face to face chat possibly

 

[Chicken Run]

I see where you are coming from, but that's not accurate. I'm not aware of any orders by government to the police to get DV convictions. I don't see what the government would get from this. What will have been ordered, in one way or another, is that there must be no deaths as a result of public services not protecting people whe they had the opportunity.

I don't know the exact details of what has gone on in this case, but i do have enough knowledge to have a good go at reading between the lines, but my thoughts are based on what i've read in the media.

It's reported that Flack assaulted her partner with a lamp whilst her was sleeping. I've seen it suggested this was as a result of him texting others girls (irrelevant as no justification for assault). I've read that she received cuts to her wrist as a result of a glass being smashed. I've read that when police initially attended she made some sort of admission of guilt. I've also seen it reported that police that responded have made reference to the crime scene being like something from a horror movie, although admittedly i don't recall the exact wording used.

I don't know if it was her partner that called police after the assault. Because of the info about the cut wrists and things I've read since her death that she has previously self-harmed, it's possible on this occasion SHE has needed an ambulance and then the ambulance service have called the police when they found out about the assault, which is thier policy and common. So it is not necessarily a given that her partner called police on her.

The police that attended would have Body Worn Videos activated. From thier arrival, what these cameras capture can be evidential, although admissions or offenders comments before being arrested and cautioned would not hold as much weight as those after arrest. Either way, if she did admit assaulting him, as has been suggested, this admission will be on camera.

It is widely reported that the boyfriend 'has not pressed charges'. It doesn't quite work like that and is lazy journalism or people watching too much crime drama. The police would make the decision to arrest at a DV incident like this, they have no choice, even if the victim says they do not want the perpatrator arrested. The reasons why should be obvious. The police will then investigate and gather the intelligence and then pass that to the CPS. In a DV investigation the police cannot make a charging decision, it has to be CPS. So any comments about the boyfriend or the police pressing charges is fake news.

So she is now in police custody and they have 24hrs to gather the evidence. What evidence do they have to pass to the CPS? Normally they key evidence would be the victims statement. I think this is what people mean by saying pressing or dropping charges. If a victim gives a statement that is evidential and means they must also be prepared to stand up in court and give that evidence. Giving a statement is classed as 'supporting the police in a prosecution' and refusing or declining is classed as 'not supporting the prosecution'. They boyfriend may have told police what happened, either when he rang 999 needing help, or when police arrived, but he may still have declined to give a formal statment. He may also have given one, but then on reflection decided to retract it, something that is also quite common.

In most cases with the victim not supporting prosecution, the investigation would result in No Further Action, sometimes lazily referred to as 'charges dropped'. However in DV cases sometimes the CPS will decide to pursue a victimless prosecution. Why? It's usually because they feel that that victim needs safeguarding, or they feel they are at risk of further harm in the future and dont want to be criticised for not doing anything when they had the chance should something more serious happen in the future. That has happened in the past. Victims of domestic violence have died and authorities been blamed for not taking action against perpatrators when they had a chance to.

On this occasion they have decided to seek a victimless prosecution. I promise you that the CPS will not put anything in front of a court unless there is a realistic chance of a prosecution. Therefore without the victim giving a statement they must be in possession of enough other evidence for them to feel a conviction is likely. What could that evidence be? Well there is a recording of the 999 call to police, this can be very good evidence. There will be statements from the police officers who attended saying what they saw, thought and what was said to them, and there is also their body camera footage. As i said earlier, I'm sure I've read somewhere that Flack at first admitted to police what she had done. Her police interview would be evidence. This could be where she admitted what she did, but it's more likely that with a solicitor present she was advised to make no comment to any questions. There could also be witness statements, either from anybody who saw it happen, but don't forget neigbours could give statements to say what they heard. You'd be amazed what can be heard through a wall. There may also be evidence from the ambulance crew that attended, medical evidence and photos of injuries. There could also be a history of other incidents that have not been reported or picked up on before. With all or some of that there is a decent chance of prosecution and i would expect the CPS decision to charge, which seems to be what has happened. They won't charge without any evidence.

There has already been a first hearing at court. Some of that evidence would have already been heard and is why stuff is already in the public domain and being reported, although admittedly there is probably some innacurate info out there too.

Domestic violence is a very serious issue that effects more people that some would think. It effects all genders and all ages. I see this every day, and in this case it is sad to see some of the comments made by individuals showing attitudes such as 'hes a grass'. I've also seen numerous people question why the CPS are persisting with this when the boyfrind has 'dropped the charges'. I hope my above information answers this sort of comment. What is clear from things ive read since her death, is that people still hold attitudes that domestic violence is awful when men beat up women, but when women beat men its not really that serious and if he is not bothered or blinded by love, why does anybody else care and want to end the violence? Or that because she was attractive and her tv shows were popular, we assume that things cant be so bad and it must be the media making a big deal about it. I've even read something suggesting her death is the CPS's fault and they should be ashamed.

Now with ALL of that said, it is terribly sad that this girl has felt she needed to take her life. Mental health is a serious an issue as domestic violence and both can lead to loss of life. She could have gone to court and been found to be not guilty, and at the time of her death she was innocent. She was clearly a troubled individual and i hope she is now at peace.

Wow, great post!

 

[OzMike]

I think a diffetent prospective would be more acurate, though you are obviously always right.

Perspective not prospective, was early here etc.

 

[Nitram]

I see where you are coming from, but that's not accurate. I'm not aware of any orders by government to the police to get DV convictions. I don't see what the government would get from this. What will have been ordered, in one way or another, is that there must be no deaths as a result of public services not protecting people whe they had the opportunity.

I don't know the exact details of what has gone on in this case, but i do have enough knowledge to have a good go at reading between the lines, but my thoughts are based on what i've read in the media.

It's reported that Flack assaulted her partner with a lamp whilst her was sleeping. I've seen it suggested this was as a result of him texting others girls (irrelevant as no justification for assault). I've read that she received cuts to her wrist as a result of a glass being smashed. I've read that when police initially attended she made some sort of admission of guilt. I've also seen it reported that police that responded have made reference to the crime scene being like something from a horror movie, although admittedly i don't recall the exact wording used.

I don't know if it was her partner that called police after the assault. Because of the info about the cut wrists and things I've read since her death that she has previously self-harmed, it's possible on this occasion SHE has needed an ambulance and then the ambulance service have called the police when they found out about the assault, which is thier policy and common. So it is not necessarily a given that her partner called police on her.

The police that attended would have Body Worn Videos activated. From thier arrival, what these cameras capture can be evidential, although admissions or offenders comments before being arrested and cautioned would not hold as much weight as those after arrest. Either way, if she did admit assaulting him, as has been suggested, this admission will be on camera.

It is widely reported that the boyfriend 'has not pressed charges'. It doesn't quite work like that and is lazy journalism or people watching too much crime drama. The police would make the decision to arrest at a DV incident like this, they have no choice, even if the victim says they do not want the perpatrator arrested. The reasons why should be obvious. The police will then investigate and gather the intelligence and then pass that to the CPS. In a DV investigation the police cannot make a charging decision, it has to be CPS. So any comments about the boyfriend or the police pressing charges is fake news.

So she is now in police custody and they have 24hrs to gather the evidence. What evidence do they have to pass to the CPS? Normally they key evidence would be the victims statement. I think this is what people mean by saying pressing or dropping charges. If a victim gives a statement that is evidential and means they must also be prepared to stand up in court and give that evidence. Giving a statement is classed as 'supporting the police in a prosecution' and refusing or declining is classed as 'not supporting the prosecution'. They boyfriend may have told police what happened, either when he rang 999 needing help, or when police arrived, but he may still have declined to give a formal statment. He may also have given one, but then on reflection decided to retract it, something that is also quite common.

In most cases with the victim not supporting prosecution, the investigation would result in No Further Action, sometimes lazily referred to as 'charges dropped'. However in DV cases sometimes the CPS will decide to pursue a victimless prosecution. Why? It's usually because they feel that that victim needs safeguarding, or they feel they are at risk of further harm in the future and dont want to be criticised for not doing anything when they had the chance should something more serious happen in the future. That has happened in the past. Victims of domestic violence have died and authorities been blamed for not taking action against perpatrators when they had a chance to.

On this occasion they have decided to seek a victimless prosecution. I promise you that the CPS will not put anything in front of a court unless there is a realistic chance of a prosecution. Therefore without the victim giving a statement they must be in possession of enough other evidence for them to feel a conviction is likely. What could that evidence be? Well there is a recording of the 999 call to police, this can be very good evidence. There will be statements from the police officers who attended saying what they saw, thought and what was said to them, and there is also their body camera footage. As i said earlier, I'm sure I've read somewhere that Flack at first admitted to police what she had done. Her police interview would be evidence. This could be where she admitted what she did, but it's more likely that with a solicitor present she was advised to make no comment to any questions. There could also be witness statements, either from anybody who saw it happen, but don't forget neigbours could give statements to say what they heard. You'd be amazed what can be heard through a wall. There may also be evidence from the ambulance crew that attended, medical evidence and photos of injuries. There could also be a history of other incidents that have not been reported or picked up on before. With all or some of that there is a decent chance of prosecution and i would expect the CPS decision to charge, which seems to be what has happened. They won't charge without any evidence.

There has already been a first hearing at court. Some of that evidence would have already been heard and is why stuff is already in the public domain and being reported, although admittedly there is probably some innacurate info out there too.

Domestic violence is a very serious issue that effects more people that some would think. It effects all genders and all ages. I see this every day, and in this case it is sad to see some of the comments made by individuals showing attitudes such as 'hes a grass'. I've also seen numerous people question why the CPS are persisting with this when the boyfrind has 'dropped the charges'. I hope my above information answers this sort of comment. What is clear from things ive read since her death, is that people still hold attitudes that domestic violence is awful when men beat up women, but when women beat men its not really that serious and if he is not bothered or blinded by love, why does anybody else care and want to end the violence? Or that because she was attractive and her tv shows were popular, we assume that things cant be so bad and it must be the media making a big deal about it. I've even read something suggesting her death is the CPS's fault and they should be ashamed.

Now with ALL of that said, it is terribly sad that this girl has felt she needed to take her life. Mental health is a serious an issue as domestic violence and both can lead to loss of life. She could have gone to court and been found to be not guilty, and at the time of her death she was innocent. She was clearly a troubled individual and i hope she is now at peace.

Great insight from someone who obviously knows the background to these DV cases. Shows how the authorities need to take a wider picture to protect the vulnerable and how difficult judgments are, especially with high profile cases. Thanks for taking the time to give your thoughts.

 

[pigbite]

Great insight from someone who obviously knows the background to these DV cases. Shows how the authorities need to take a wider picture to protect the vulnerable and how difficult judgments are, especially with high profile cases. Thanks for taking the time to give your thoughts.

Indeed. Absolutely no doubt the impending court case was very troubling to Ms. Flack but to single it out as some kind of malicious show trial is IMHO unfair and deflects from the wider issues around trolling on social media, the support for mental health issues (which has been ripped to shreds funding wise for years), the role of the media in responsible, ethical reporting and mostly how our own behaviours feed the machine and either directly or indirectly contribute to harming others.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I see where you are coming from, but that's not accurate. I'm not aware of any orders by government to the police to get DV convictions. I don't see what the government would get from this. What will have been ordered, in one way or another, is that there must be no deaths as a result of public services not protecting people whe they had the opportunity.

I don't know the exact details of what has gone on in this case, but i do have enough knowledge to have a good go at reading between the lines, but my thoughts are based on what i've read in the media.

It's reported that Flack assaulted her partner with a lamp whilst her was sleeping. I've seen it suggested this was as a result of him texting others girls (irrelevant as no justification for assault). I've read that she received cuts to her wrist as a result of a glass being smashed. I've read that when police initially attended she made some sort of admission of guilt. I've also seen it reported that police that responded have made reference to the crime scene being like something from a horror movie, although admittedly i don't recall the exact wording used.

I don't know if it was her partner that called police after the assault. Because of the info about the cut wrists and things I've read since her death that she has previously self-harmed, it's possible on this occasion SHE has needed an ambulance and then the ambulance service have called the police when they found out about the assault, which is thier policy and common. So it is not necessarily a given that her partner called police on her.

The police that attended would have Body Worn Videos activated. From thier arrival, what these cameras capture can be evidential, although admissions or offenders comments before being arrested and cautioned would not hold as much weight as those after arrest. Either way, if she did admit assaulting him, as has been suggested, this admission will be on camera.

It is widely reported that the boyfriend 'has not pressed charges'. It doesn't quite work like that and is lazy journalism or people watching too much crime drama. The police would make the decision to arrest at a DV incident like this, they have no choice, even if the victim says they do not want the perpatrator arrested. The reasons why should be obvious. The police will then investigate and gather the intelligence and then pass that to the CPS. In a DV investigation the police cannot make a charging decision, it has to be CPS. So any comments about the boyfriend or the police pressing charges is fake news.

So she is now in police custody and they have 24hrs to gather the evidence. What evidence do they have to pass to the CPS? Normally they key evidence would be the victims statement. I think this is what people mean by saying pressing or dropping charges. If a victim gives a statement that is evidential and means they must also be prepared to stand up in court and give that evidence. Giving a statement is classed as 'supporting the police in a prosecution' and refusing or declining is classed as 'not supporting the prosecution'. They boyfriend may have told police what happened, either when he rang 999 needing help, or when police arrived, but he may still have declined to give a formal statment. He may also have given one, but then on reflection decided to retract it, something that is also quite common.

In most cases with the victim not supporting prosecution, the investigation would result in No Further Action, sometimes lazily referred to as 'charges dropped'. However in DV cases sometimes the CPS will decide to pursue a victimless prosecution. Why? It's usually because they feel that that victim needs safeguarding, or they feel they are at risk of further harm in the future and dont want to be criticised for not doing anything when they had the chance should something more serious happen in the future. That has happened in the past. Victims of domestic violence have died and authorities been blamed for not taking action against perpatrators when they had a chance to.

On this occasion they have decided to seek a victimless prosecution. I promise you that the CPS will not put anything in front of a court unless there is a realistic chance of a prosecution. Therefore without the victim giving a statement they must be in possession of enough other evidence for them to feel a conviction is likely. What could that evidence be? Well there is a recording of the 999 call to police, this can be very good evidence. There will be statements from the police officers who attended saying what they saw, thought and what was said to them, and there is also their body camera footage. As i said earlier, I'm sure I've read somewhere that Flack at first admitted to police what she had done. Her police interview would be evidence. This could be where she admitted what she did, but it's more likely that with a solicitor present she was advised to make no comment to any questions. There could also be witness statements, either from anybody who saw it happen, but don't forget neigbours could give statements to say what they heard. You'd be amazed what can be heard through a wall. There may also be evidence from the ambulance crew that attended, medical evidence and photos of injuries. There could also be a history of other incidents that have not been reported or picked up on before. With all or some of that there is a decent chance of prosecution and i would expect the CPS decision to charge, which seems to be what has happened. They won't charge without any evidence.

There has already been a first hearing at court. Some of that evidence would have already been heard and is why stuff is already in the public domain and being reported, although admittedly there is probably some innacurate info out there too.

Domestic violence is a very serious issue that effects more people that some would think. It effects all genders and all ages. I see this every day, and in this case it is sad to see some of the comments made by individuals showing attitudes such as 'hes a grass'. I've also seen numerous people question why the CPS are persisting with this when the boyfrind has 'dropped the charges'. I hope my above information answers this sort of comment. What is clear from things ive read since her death, is that people still hold attitudes that domestic violence is awful when men beat up women, but when women beat men its not really that serious and if he is not bothered or blinded by love, why does anybody else care and want to end the violence? Or that because she was attractive and her tv shows were popular, we assume that things cant be so bad and it must be the media making a big deal about it. I've even read something suggesting her death is the CPS's fault and they should be ashamed.

Now with ALL of that said, it is terribly sad that this girl has felt she needed to take her life. Mental health is a serious an issue as domestic violence and both can lead to loss of life. She could have gone to court and been found to be not guilty, and at the time of her death she was innocent. She was clearly a troubled individual and i hope she is now at peace.

That's a very interesting post. I just want to pick up on one line you wrote - "In most cases with the victim not supporting prosecution, the investigation would result in No Further Action ..... However in DV cases sometimes the CPS will decide to pursue a victimless prosecution. Why? It's usually because they feel that that victim needs safeguarding, or they feel they are at risk of further harm in the future."

I suppose the main thing to ponder is why they have chosen this particular case of domestic violence performed by the women on her male partner to pursue a victimless prosecution? As you say, most cases like this the investigation results in no further action, and I imagine an even greater proportion of cases by women on men end that way. So why this one? Its hard not to come to the conclusion that the CPS wanted a show trial to demonstrate that they take these kind of DV cases seriously. Considering that a show-trial of a celebrity will place even more stress on the defendant than a normal one, if it was know that she had demonstrable mental health issues then I think the CPS is in some way culpable in her suicide.

 

[Weststander]

Ironically with social media in the spotlight, David Gold puts his foot in it. At least he apologised soon after. Another example of tapping away thoughtlessly.


"West Ham United co-chairman David Gold has apologised and promised to make a donation to a mental health charity after liking a social media post that described the late TV presenter Caroline Flack as "weak".
Flack, 40, was found dead in her north London home on Saturday.

Gold had liked a tweet that said something positive about the Premier League club, but also referenced the death of former Love Island presenter Flack.

He said it was "never his intention" to condone that part of the tweet and quickly removed the like.

In a statement released via the club, Gold said: "I apologise unreservedly for liking a tweet last night that I shouldn't have.

"It was never my intention to condone the sentiment expressed in the second half of it. I hastily pressed 'like' and very much regret doing so.

"I will be making a donation to Heads Together to recognise their important work." "

 

[Arthritic Toe]

What is clear from things ive read since her death, is that people still hold attitudes that domestic violence is awful when men beat up women, but when women beat men its not really that serious...

Yes and the TV show made some sort of comment about "holding the door open for her return". Can you imagine them doing the same if the presenter were male and charged with wife-beating?

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Ironically with social media in the spotlight, David Gold puts his foot in it. At least he apologised soon after. Another example of tapping away thoughtlessly.


"West Ham United co-chairman David Gold has apologised and promised to make a donation to a mental health charity after liking a social media post that described the late TV presenter Caroline Flack as "weak"

Thing is, these people invariably initially post their true thoughts on any given subject. Then get bombarded with social media mob rule howls of mainly fake outrage, then just about always get forced to retract their initial genuine thoughts for no other reason than damage limitation and to call off the mob so the mob then effortlessly flit to another cause/target of mainly fake outrage

 

[junior]

That's a very interesting post. I just want to pick up on one line you wrote - "In most cases with the victim not supporting prosecution, the investigation would result in No Further Action ..... However in DV cases sometimes the CPS will decide to pursue a victimless prosecution. Why? It's usually because they feel that that victim needs safeguarding, or they feel they are at risk of further harm in the future."

I suppose the main thing to ponder is why they have chosen this particular case of domestic violence performed by the women on her male partner to pursue a victimless prosecution? As you say, most cases like this the investigation results in no further action, and I imagine an even greater proportion of cases by women on men end that way. So why this one? Its hard not to come to the conclusion that the CPS wanted a show trial to demonstrate that they take these kind of DV cases seriously. Considering that a show-trial of a celebrity will place even more stress on the defendant than a normal one, if it was know that she had demonstrable mental health issues then I think the CPS is in some way culpable in her suicide.

When i said "most cases", i actually meant most non DV cases. They won't have just chosen this case. There will be hundreds of ongoing victimless posecutions ongoing at the moment at various stages. Some will get found guilty because as per my original post, the weight of evidence against them is undeniable, and some will get found not guilty by the courts.

It may not be hard for you to come to the conclusion that the CPS want some sort of showcase trial, but it is for me. I wonder how you have formed that opinion. I may be doing you a disservice by suggesting you don't have an in-depth knowledge of the CPS, but you may also be led by things you have seen incorrectly reported in the media, or by an elligence of some sort to the defendant Flack, or by a dislike of the legal system for one reason or another.

What i can tell you, from experience, is that the CPS will absolutely not want any sort of trial which has a risk of then being seen publicly in a negative light, but they don't have a choice and will simply be following a process. There is no bias in the legal system. There can't be because there won't just have been one decision maker involved to get things as far as they will have got.

On the mental health side of things, that will have been taken into account long before it got to this stage, probably several times if not more, and definitely before the first hearing at court which has alreaady happened don't forget. At the stage things were at, she would already have been deemed fit to stand trial and decision is made by a panel of professionals, including mental health specialists, it is not made by the police and CPS. That doesn't mean things can't change, which on this occasion the fact she has taken her life does suggest that there were serious mental health issues. But that doesn't mean somebody from the CPS is sat somwhere thinking "shit i forgot to consider that she might have had mental health problems". It will have been known.

You may feel that my posts and feelings are very anti Flack, or unsympathetic, or pro judicial system. They are not. I am frustrated and dissapointed by the CPS and courts on a daily basis in a professional capacity, but i do not feel comfortable sitting and watching people pass judgment on things they know little about and are then forming opinions that are based on mistruths, and then perpetuating those opinions. I simply have written some facts and explained a few things which i hope will enable people to make more informed opinions should they wish to.

 

[junior]

If anyone thinks it is as simple as that a person with mental health issues should not stand trial, then read this...

https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/legal-rights/courts-and-mental-health/overview/

 

[Weststander]

Thing is, these people invariably initially post their true thoughts on any given subject. Then get bombarded with social media mob rule howls of mainly fake outrage, then just about always get forced to retract their initial genuine thoughts for no other reason than damage limitation and to call off the mob so the mob then effortlessly flit to another cause/target of mainly fake outrage

Yep, they leave in a virtual goldfish bowl, with a baying mob waiting for a faux pas. It probably was Gold's true take on suicide.

But the thing is, I'd always challenge someone in real life who describes a suicide victim or someone suffering with mental illness as: weak, or they should toughen up or cheer up, or that they're incredibly selfish.

So if Gold or anyone else comes out that antiquated, simplistic narrative, they should be pulled up. Although some portray everything as terrible in the UK compared to fabled good old days, we've improved in so many ways. You only have to see NSC kick into action when a 'bloke' needs emotional support … that would not have been the case a few years ago.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

When i said "most cases", i actually meant most non DV cases. They won't have just chosen this case. There will be hundreds of ongoing victimless posecutions ongoing at the moment at various stages. Some will get found guilty because as per my original post, the weight of evidence against them is undeniable, and some will get found not guilty by the courts.

It may not be hard for you to come to the conclusion that the CPS want some sort of showcase trial, but it is for me. I wonder how you have formed that opinion. I may be doing you a disservice by suggesting you don't have an in-depth knowledge of the CPS, but you may also be led by things you have seen incorrectly reported in the media, or by an elligence of some sort to the defendant Flack, or by a dislike of the legal system for one reason or another.

What i can tell you, from experience, is that the CPS will absolutely not want any sort of trial which has a risk of then being seen publicly in a negative light, but they don't have a choice and will simply be following a process. There is no bias in the legal system. There can't be because there won't just have been one decision maker involved to get things as far as they will have got.

On the mental health side of things, that will have been taken into account long before it got to this stage, probably several times if not more, and definitely before the first hearing at court which has alreaady happened don't forget. At the stage things were at, she would already have been deemed fit to stand trial and decision is made by a panel of professionals, including mental health specialists, it is not made by the police and CPS. That doesn't mean things can't change, which on this occasion the fact she has taken her life does suggest that there were serious mental health issues. But that doesn't mean somebody from the CPS is sat somwhere thinking "shit i forgot to consider that she might have had mental health problems". It will have been known.

You may feel that my posts and feelings are very anti Flack, or unsympathetic, or pro judicial system. They are not. I am frustrated and dissapointed by the CPS and courts on a daily basis in a professional capacity, but i do not feel comfortable sitting and watching people pass judgment on things they know little about and are then forming opinions that are based on mistruths, and then perpetuating those opinions. I simply have written some facts and explained a few things which i hope will enable people to make more informed opinions should they wish to.

Thanks, I'm not making any judgement about anyone, and I understand what you are saying about the CPS. I guess I'm looking at the phrase that you used earlier "that people still hold attitudes that domestic violence is awful when men beat up women, but when women beat men its not really that serious" - and I know you are disagreeing with that attitude and not implying that the CPS has that attitude, but still one does wonder how prevalent that attitude is in the police force at large, and certainly amongst the public and media - and its not a big leap to see how a high profile case could benefit the changing of attitudes. You can see that, I'm sure, but I also accept your view that the CPS would be trying not to see it through that lens.

So even if not a factor here, nevertheless in the great history of justice, one must surely believe that certain cases have been selected for trial because they may lead to important precedents or desired cultural changes. However ingrained good judicial practice may be, I am a strong believer that human-nature will always creep in, in any walk of life.

 

[Megazone]

I wonder what her side of the story was in regards to her arrest that she seemed very determined to get across when given the chance?? There was plenty of old tabloid shite about the boyfriend cheating on her way before the arrest incident.

Lewis Burton (the boyfriend) has put out a RIP message to her with "I" starting in nearly every sentence.....

"My heart is broken we had something so special. I am so lost for words I am in so much pain I miss you so much I know you felt safe with me you always said I don’t think about anything else when I am with you and I was not allowed to be there this time I kept asking and asking.
I will be your voice baby I promise I will ask all the questions you wanted and I will get all the answers nothing will bring you back but I will try make you proud everyday.
I love you with all my heart ��"

It comes across as very 'poor but heroic me'. I wonder if she'd been going through any emotional or psychological abuse from him leading to her attacking him? They'd only been together for a matter of months before the incident which led to an arrest, which begs the question why was he posting pics of them together online with "I love you" stuff all over it when they had a contact ban imposed on them which would've included the sort of stuff he dd online just before her suicide? It was so close to valentines when he decided to post stuff indirectly to her, that it could suggests emotional manipulation with the timing of his postings and the impending court case coming up knowing she'd posted publicly how she couldn't wait to get her side of the story out there.


He was acting like they had never been apart, let alone been together no longer than just a few months, with the need to posts what he did. It comes across as controlling knowing the law, her mental difficulties and how clearly she must've been distressed by whatever he'd done to her. So why put up pics keeping her potentially tied emotionally to him when they had been banned from seeing each other? Control maybe?

There's many horrible people out there who are masters at making their victims look like the abusers. They will do anything for a negative reaction and once they get it they'll come down on you like a ton of bricks going to th lengths of bringing in the law. They tend to be people who have this false identity of themselves usually being perfect and very vain. This Lewis Burton bloke is loved by the women, probably gets his arse licked wherever he goes and is clearly a bit "I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I" based on his RIP message to his love of his life.

There's always 2 sides to a story. RIP

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

Funnily enough, with you posting, watching a good movie can be amazing.

Remember reading an article about a poor woman who had decided to end it all. For some reason she sat down and watched an episode of "The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin". By the end of it she was laughing for the first time in a long while. She had written to the BBC thanking them for the series saying it had turned things around for her and she had subsequently sought and received the help she needed.

The power of humour

 

[nicko31]

Interesting how the government yesterday started going on about social media and how things need to change, yet the real villians who plant the seeds of hate are the British tabloid press.

The likes of the Mail, the Sun and the Star are left alone, I wonder why?

Incidentally, couple of shameful posts on this thread. They are the product are these rags that have destroyed so many lives, Princess Diana, Paula Yates, Jade Goody the list goes on...

 

[Weststander]

Remember reading an article about a poor woman who had decided to end it all. For some reason she sat down and watched an episode of "The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin". By the end of it she was laughing for the first time in a long while. She had written to the BBC thanking them for the series saying it had turned things around for her and she had subsequently sought and received the help she needed.

The power of humour

Even short youtube clips of the likes of Paul Whitehouse sketches, I find, can lift the spirits. Also listening/watching favourite music tracks, artists, gigs.

Just the small things in life.