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

[Triggaaar]

Ok, she told some lies, but what I mean is, and I'm sure you understand, that she may not have lied about everything, that she may have had good reason to believe they did things, and made the claims in good faith.

It is possible that she made the claims in good faith, but it is also possible that she made the claims knowing that it was a lot of nonsense.

That just because the guys were found not guilty doesn't mean she made everything up, which is how she is being treated.

Which bits do you think she didn't make up? 'She' is not really being treated particularly badly, because we don't know who she is. Some of us are not impressed with what she has done, because it has caused a lot of harm to some innocent people.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

In light of the Sally Bercow ruling I wonder if any of the Albion four will be legally pursuing those who referred to them as "rapists" on the internet?

I hope you're not suggesting a certain message board popular with mobile home owners and the trainspotting fraternity

 

[nwgull]

There was more than enough in this case, for the Police, CPS and Judges to deem that there was a case to answer.

All the police found on the players' phones after forensic examination was 1 photo that didn't show anything, and they also failed to bother checking Lewis Dunk's phone records to see that he had indeed been on the phone for over half an hour at the time. There was nothing in this case for the CPS to pursue on other than the story of an unreliable witness with a history of elaborate lying and who claimed she couldn't remember a lot about the night, but that she was not drunk, even though this contradicted her friend's version of events that they'd both had 10-15 shots and shared a bottle of wine.

As has been said before, a complete waste of taxpayers' money for the CPS to have pursued it and more to do with the accused being young professional footballers than anything else I suspect.

 

[El Sid]

It is possible that she made the claims in good faith, but it is also possible that she made the claims knowing that it was a lot of nonsense.

That's it though isn't it - you don't know.

The case is over - the players have been found not guilty - yet people on here continue to speculate.
Let's face it, on what we ACTUALLY know nobody comes out of this completely smelling of roses, and not just the plaintiff or defendants.

If you were not at the trial and did not hear all the evidence, how can you possibly hope to add anything to the arguments.
You cannot possibly hope to judge anything or anybody based on Argus snippets and twitter feeds.

It's all over - move on.

 

[Acker79]

It is possible that she made the claims in good faith, but it is also possible that she made the claims knowing that it was a lot of nonsense.

Which bits do you think she didn't make up? 'She' is not really being treated particularly badly, because we don't know who she is. Some of us are not impressed with what she has done, because it has caused a lot of harm to some innocent people.

The moment the verdict came out people on here were jumping on her asking for her identity to come out, demanding she face charges and fines, because she dared to make a claim that it would seem at least one juror in this case, and at least three in the last case, believed to be true. We may not know her identity, but the she is still taking a battering on here (in typical fickle football fan fashion, just a couple of pages after young, advantaged football players were being criticised) and just because her name is not being listed here doesn't mean these comments directed at her are not treating her badly.