Court case involving Albion players - the (new) only thread allowed - ALL found NOT GUILTY

[dougdeep]

Dunk, Rodgers and Cook awarded costs.

 

[Acker79]

I think though I'd have to make some enquiries that it has to be hugely obvious that its a false claim for a prosecution and therefore I think fixed penalty notices are used for wasting Police time. I wouldn't want victims to be scared to make an allegation if they thought they wouldn't be believed so that's a good thing, but its frustrating that genuine victims are deterred due to poor prosecution rates which are in turn partly due to a minority of false claims.

Why is it obvious? The CPS felt their case was good enough to pursue it for a second time. Neither trial resulted in unanimous decisions, if the jury doesn't reach a unanimous decision how can it be obvious? At least juror person in this trial and at least three in the last believed the prosecution.

Low conviction rates are largely down to poor evidence, poor prosecution, societal attitudes to women and sex. false claims are a very small number of those that get to court. You will punish sexual assault victims who don't have quite enough evidence or whose prosecutor makes a mistake or otherwise fails to do their job.

Again, not guilty does not mean the alleged victim is a liar, to treat it as such with fixed penalty notices will do more damage to fighting sexual assaults than low conviction rates.

 

[Goldstone1976]

Why is it obvious? The CPS felt their case was good enough to pursue it for a second time. Neither trial resulted in unanimous decisions, if the jury doesn't reach a unanimous decision how can it be obvious?

Low conviction rates are largely down to poor evidence, poor prosecution, societal attitudes to women and sex. false claims are a very small number of those that get to court. You will punish sexual assault victims who don't have quite enough evidence or whose prosecutor makes a mistake or otherwise fails to do their job.

Again, not guilty does not mean the alleged victim is a liar, to treat it as such with fixed penalty notices will do more damage to fighting sexual assaults than low conviction rates.

Er, totally, utterly this. I must stop looking at this thread...blood pressure....

 

[HitchinSeagull]

Why is it obvious? The CPS felt their case was good enough to pursue it for a second time. Neither trial resulted in unanimous decisions, if the jury doesn't reach a unanimous decision how can it be obvious? At least juror person in this trial and at least three in the last believed the prosecution.

Low conviction rates are largely down to poor evidence, poor prosecution, societal attitudes to women and sex. false claims are a very small number of those that get to court. You will punish sexual assault victims who don't have quite enough evidence or whose prosecutor makes a mistake or otherwise fails to do their job.

Again, not guilty does not mean the alleged victim is a liar, to treat it as such with fixed penalty notices will do more damage to fighting sexual assaults than low conviction rates.

Sorry bad sentence structure from myself, I didn't mean that it was hugely obvious that this was a false claim, just that in any case it has to be hugely obvious in order to prosecute the victim for making a false allegation.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I have not said he was guilty of anything, he was involved directly and indirectly in 3 criminal offences, this is undeniable.

Fact: He wound her up about her photographs being shown around the club and kidded her that a video would be put on YouTube.
Fact: He was involved in an affray, he may or may not have been guilty, we will now never know.
Fact: He smashed a girl's phone and threw it down a drain. It now turns out that girl was the same girl involved in Fact 1.

WTF? Its very much 'deniable', given that in only one of the three instances you mention has any criminal activity even been proven to have taken place.

 

[Triggaaar]

Why is it obvious? The CPS felt their case was good enough to pursue it for a second time. Neither trial resulted in unanimous decisions, if the jury doesn't reach a unanimous decision how can it be obvious? At least juror person in this trial and at least three in the last believed the prosecution.

Do jurors have to vote guilty or not guilty, or are they allowed to say they're not sure, and abstain?

It seemed pretty obvious after the first trial that they were never going to convict. At least 10 of the jurors felt that Dunk was not guilty of voyeurism. How they could decide he wasn't guilty of voyeurism, but may have been guilty of assault is beyond me. Unfortunately jurors can be quite dim, as exampled by the recent case where the jury asked the judge if they could make their decision based of hearsay, and other 'evidence' they had learned outside of the court.

 

[Birdie Boy]

WTF? Its very much 'deniable', given that in only one of the three instances you mention has any criminal activity even been proven to have taken place.

Really? Are you saying that there wasn't an affray and that he wasn't there? Funny, cause that is not what he said in court.

 

[Acker79]

Do jurors have to vote guilty or not guilty, or are they allowed to say they're not sure, and abstain?

It seemed pretty obvious after the first trial that they were never going to convict. At least 10 of the jurors felt that Dunk was not guilty of voyeurism. How they could decide he wasn't guilty of voyeurism, but may have been guilty of assault is beyond me. Unfortunately jurors can be quite dim, as exampled by the recent case where the jury asked the judge if they could make their decision based of hearsay, and other 'evidence' they had learned outside of the court.

Surely, since 'guilty' needs to be beyond a doubt, 'not sure' means 'not guilty'?

 

[Birdie Boy]

Just to raise blood pressure against the CPS;

CourtNewsUK ‏@CourtNewsUK 5m

Taxpayers will foot the bill for top QCs hired by Brighton footballers cleared of sex assault.

 

[Triggaaar]

Surely, since 'guilty' needs to be beyond a doubt, 'not sure' means 'not guilty'?

I don't know, it was a genuine question.

 

[Acker79]

Really? Are you saying that there wasn't an affray and that he wasn't there? Funny, cause that is not what he said in court.

Affray would be the one count of criminal activity hans mentions, what are the other two? Because of the obvious three you could be (wrongly) referring to, one was thrown out of court, so no criminal activity occurred in that one, and the other today returned not guilty verdicts on all counts meaning no criminal activity occurred here.

 

[Steve.S]

Why is it obvious? The CPS felt their case was good enough to pursue it for a second time. Neither trial resulted in unanimous decisions, if the jury doesn't reach a unanimous decision how can it be obvious? At least juror person in this trial and at least three in the last believed the prosecution.

Low conviction rates are largely down to poor evidence, poor prosecution, societal attitudes to women and sex. false claims are a very small number of those that get to court. You will punish sexual assault victims who don't have quite enough evidence or whose prosecutor makes a mistake or otherwise fails to do their job.

Again, not guilty does not mean the alleged victim is a liar, to treat it as such with fixed penalty notices will do more damage to fighting sexual assaults than low conviction rates.

Well said, can not believe some of the reactions on here towards the female. The CPS make decisions to prosecute or not, not the public. They must of thought they had some evidence. That's why we have a jury system,as people can be found not guilty.

 

[Birdie Boy]

WTF? Its very much 'deniable', given that in only one of the three instances you mention has any criminal activity even been proven to have taken place.

A Brighton and Hove Albion footballer's arrogance sparked a "large-scale" fight outside a nightclub between groups of black and white men, a court heard today (November 19).

Kazenga Lua Lua, formerly of Premiership team Newcastle United and now playing Brighton and Hove Albion, his friend Andy Mogwo and co-accused Kevin Ashong, who claimed to have heard a racial insult, deny affray at Newcastle Crown Court.

When police interviewed Lua Lua later, the court heard he admitted being outside the club and that he had walked between Mr Ball and a friend.

No denying he was there.... maybe I was correct in that he was either involved directly or indirectly.....

 

[Triggaaar]

The CPS make decisions to prosecute or not, not the public.

Yes they do, but that doesn't mean they always make sensible decisions, and it doesn't mean we're not allowed to say that we think this was a bad decision. It's cost us (taxpayers) a lot of money, and it's right for us to question how they spend our money.

 

[Birdie Boy]

Yes they do, but that doesn't mean they always make sensible decisions, and it doesn't mean we're not allowed to say that we think this was a bad decision. It's cost us (taxpayers) a lot of money, and it's right for us to question how they spend our money.

Exactly, see port#429.

 

[Acker79]

I don't know, it was a genuine question.

And it's a good question. My answer is just my take on it. One would assume that perhaps an extension of your other point (jurors can be stupid and not follow the logic I put forward) could explain how they didn't vote not guilty while also not voting guilty. But even if that was so, my point would stand that people weren't convinced either way, that the decision was split and as such result of the trial wasn't so obvious.

 

[Triggaaar]

When police interviewed Lua Lua later, the court heard he admitted being outside the club and that he had walked between Mr Ball and a friend.

No denying he was there.... maybe I was correct in that he was either involved directly or indirectly.....

No, you weren't correct, because you said "he has now been involved, directly or indirectly in 3 criminal offences in the last year or so" - whereas the affray in Newcastle is 1 incident.

 

[Acker79]

A Brighton and Hove Albion footballer's arrogance sparked a "large-scale" fight outside a nightclub between groups of black and white men, a court heard today (November 19).

Kazenga Lua Lua, formerly of Premiership team Newcastle United and now playing Brighton and Hove Albion, his friend Andy Mogwo and co-accused Kevin Ashong, who claimed to have heard a racial insult, deny affray at Newcastle Crown Court.

When police interviewed Lua Lua later, the court heard he admitted being outside the club and that he had walked between Mr Ball and a friend.

No denying he was there.... maybe I was correct in that he was either involved directly or indirectly.....

Read hans' post again. He is saying only one of the three incidents involved criminal activity. He isn't denying lualua was involved in the crime of affray.

 

[Arthur]

Just to raise blood pressure against the CPS;

CourtNewsUK ‏@CourtNewsUK 5m

Taxpayers will foot the bill for top QCs hired by Brighton footballers cleared of sex assault.

And so they ****ing should! Some anonymous bint with a fixation for footballers has made these lads life hell for the last couple of years. She will walk away a loser in the case but with no further action with the majority of the world not knowing who the **** she is. Those 4 lads will have this against their character for the rest of their lives!

 

[RowleyBirkinQ.C(deceased)]

Court case involving Albion players - the (new) only thread allowed - ALL found

A bit of good news at last.
Onwards and upwards my fine friends,
onwards and upwards