• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "The more we know the more we are disappointed"

Collapse

  • Pondlife
    replied
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • ratewhore
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • expat
    replied
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    WTF did the CPS think they were doing?
    As someone said, it's a terrible thing to fall into the hands of The Authorities.

    Leave a comment:


  • Moscow Mule
    replied
    Originally posted by Paddy View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    Originally posted by Paddy View Post
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • Paddy
    replied
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    Originally posted by Paddy View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Moscow Mule
    replied
    Originally posted by Paddy View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paddy
    replied
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    But sex convictions for teenage dalliances? OK, maybe British judges are sensible about this and don't want to convict a 16 year olod for shagging their 15 year old partner, but many foreign courts, especially in the US, see this differently. I once took a look at one of those American 'sex offender' sites and there were people who had had it off with their partner when one party was a couple of days too young and they were just old enough; those people's lives are f**ked for doing something which a hell of a lot of people have done and would be viewed as harmless by most of us, if we're being honest about ourselves. You'd think you can't put randy teenagers in the same category as those priests who fiddled with kids, but it's happening.
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • cailin maith
    replied
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    I ate in a restaurant in Delhi and saw rats running about under the tables. I was a little concerned, but the gentleman at the next table attempted to reassure me by saying ‘no need to worry; if the rats are dead you should worry’.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    I ate in a restaurant in Delhi and saw rats running about under the tables. I was a little concerned, but the gentleman at the next table attempted to reassure me by saying ‘no need to worry; if the rats are dead you should worry’.

    Leave a comment:


  • cailin maith
    replied
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    Don't go to Mexico.

    You need a can of raid & a zippo to get rid of the beasts they have out there.
    I've been to Mexico, thankfully no cockroaches in the Hotel (that I saw anyway!!)

    Leave a comment:


  • Gibbon
    replied
    I regularly travel to Rome and like to use teh same hotel so I use Tripadvisor to keep it down teh ratings and prevent it been booked up for when I want to go

    Leave a comment:


  • expat
    replied
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    Don't go to Mexico.

    You need a can of raid & a zippo to get rid of the beasts they have out there.
    Nah, in Mexico once I just beat them with the broken leg off the bed, and the ants carried them off for me.

    In Central Africa, though, I slept in a police station where I faced them eyeball to eyeball, 4-inch antenna (the cockroaches, I mean), and had to spray them with a can of insecticide bearing the name of a major oil company. I don't know what refining by-products were in it, but it annihilated the roaches.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X