The more we know the more we are disappointed

[Moscow Mule]

This case makes a mockery of the law and a mockery over real rape cases.

Not really, it makes a mockery of the advice he was given.

Never, ever plead guilty when there is a chance reasonable people would let you off.

[Mich the Tester]

Friend’s son was 16yo when he made friends with a 15yo daughter of a family from hell who were always in trouble. The couple were discovered heavy petting by family from hell who went to the police. The CPS prosecuted for “Attempted Rape” (Rape only because the girl was under 16). When the case came to court the girl was 16 and he was 17. He was advised to plead guilty in order not to put through both the girl and himself through cross-examination. He got a six month suspended sentence that on appeal by the CPS led to a six month custodial sentence and an entry on the sex register.


This case makes a mockery of the law and a mockery over real rape cases.

Indeed. Judges are employed to do what it says on the tin; apply the law ‘judiciously’. A judge with a brain and a conscience would have thrown this out of court. The CPS are obviously on a point scoring exercise too, and this kind of stupidity negates their purpose. And the CPS going to appeal for a tougher sentence? Disgusting; they should be locked up.

[Mich the Tester]

Not really, it makes a mockery of the advice he was given.

Never, ever plead guilty when there is a chance reasonable people would let you off.

In this case the judge and should could have intervened because there's no way a 17 year old could know whether the advice was good.

This is precisely the kind of case I meant. Frankly the CPS should be prosecuted for wasting the court's time.

[Paddy]

Not really, it makes a mockery of the advice he was given.

Never, ever plead guilty when there is a chance reasonable people would let you off.

If he pleaded not guilty; the prosecution would have cross-examined both the girl and the boy (who were still friends). The cross examination would have gone into intimate details of what they were doing, what the state of arousal was at the time and so on; and all this evidence would have been given in front of both families and the public.

[Mich the Tester]

If he pleaded not guilty; the prosecution would have cross-examined both the girl and the boy (who were still friends). The cross examination would have gone into intimate details of what they were doing, what the state of arousal was at the time and so on; and all this evidence would have been given in front of both families and the public.

WTF did the CPS think they were doing?

[Moscow Mule]

If he pleaded not guilty; the prosecution would have cross-examined both the girl and the boy (who were still friends). The cross examination would have gone into intimate details of what they were doing, what the state of arousal was at the time and so on; and all this evidence would have been given in front of both families and the public.

Yes, and he would likely be a free man without a blemish on his character.

Hell of a sacrifice to make.

[expat]

WTF did the CPS think they were doing?

As someone said, it's a terrible thing to fall into the hands of The Authorities.

[ratewhore]

[Pondlife]

WTF did the CPS think they were doing?

Acting on a complaint from the underage girl's parents.

The young lad was badly advised, clearly.