Ripper Hoax

[voron]

AH....I see your point.

Best to live in a box and eat worms. Hopefully no one will make an allegation

[steve'O]

You missunderstand.
It's the fact that YOU have to pay to prove it is not your beansprout.
Does anyone know how much it costs for a DNA test nowadays?

[voron]

Clear evidence?? Am i responsible for all the Clear evidences in this country?
I think we are talking about the same thing here. Just 'cos she's got something to touch, dosn't mean Uncle Tom touched it......

Yes, but blood and DNA tests can prove that it wasn't Uncle Tom's beans that have sprouted.

[steve'O]

Steve'O, that's a relatively simple matter, as there is clear evidence; a baby. But what if that girl comes forward and says Uncle Tom touched her twenty years ago or raped her five years ago? It might be true, it might be false, but how can it be proved? It's simply one person's word against another.
If Sally has always disliked Uncle Tom (say he didn't lend her the £5k she needs) and decides to tell police he abused her as a child in order to exact revenge, that's a terrible way to destroy a person's life. Increasingly we are seeing the burden of evidence shift. It's a worrying trend.

Clear evidence?? Am i responsible for all the Clear evidences in this country?
I think we are talking about the same thing here. Just 'cos she's got something to touch, dosn't mean Uncle Tom touched it......

[voron]

Steve'O, that's a relatively simple matter, as there is clear evidence; a baby. But what if that girl comes forward and says Uncle Tom touched her twenty years ago or raped her five years ago? It might be true, it might be false, but how can it be proved? It's simply one person's word against another.
If Sally has always disliked Uncle Tom (say he didn't lend her the £5k she needs) and decides to tell police he abused her as a child in order to exact revenge, that's a terrible way to destroy a person's life. Increasingly we are seeing the burden of evidence shift. It's a worrying trend.

[steve'O]

Wake up and smell the coffee!
If a girl gets up the duff, and says it was you, who do you think has to prove it?
And I don't think the tests are 100% it would only prove you could be the Father not that you arn't.

Or so I have heard.........

[voron]

Indeed.

And the police actually go trawling for scrotes to fit people up... see the number of people accused of child abuse in children's homes... some would be guilty, but a lot were just fitted up.

Which brings us back to the new police powers to combat terrorism. As I said before, given the current climate we are all one false allegation away from a ruined life.

[voron]

Why has this country not got a statute of limitations?

This has reminded me of the Jonathan King case. I don't know whether King is guilty or innocent, and if he is guilty then he can go to hell, but the case has always troubled me. I didn't follow it in great detail so perhaps I missed something, but it struck me that he was found guilty on little more than the victim's allegations. I don't care about Jonathan King, but it does worry me that a person can decide to make an allegation dating back over thirty years and to be convicted on zero evidence.
If that is true then everyone on this board is at mercy of fate. What is to prevent an old flame or colleague deciding to invent a story against you?

[voron]

Advances in DNA testing, viz: amplification. Probably got something off the back of one of the stamps.

Either that or someone finally decided to tip off the police. Perhaps an ex partner looking for revenge?

[threaded]

Advances in DNA testing, viz: amplification. Probably got something off the back of one of the stamps.

[BoredBloke]

How the hell did they catch him this long after the event?

[steve'O]

BBC Story


So why are they suddenly so confident?

Someone in Scotland yard probabaly watched an episode of Frost and remembered that his job wasn't all about dishing out Traffic fines and annoying Ethnic groups?

[voron]

BBC Story

A man is continuing to be questioned in connection with hoax letters and a tape sent to police during the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper nearly 30 years ago.

Yet before it was said that:

any efforts to catch "Wearside Jack" were officially abandoned in September 2003, with police saying they would be unable to prosecute any suspect because of the time that had elapsed.

So why are they suddenly so confident?