Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

They don't know how many people have been falsely accused. Or do they?

millroly

Patron
Verified
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
89
Reaction score
43
Location
the Exeter Area
Status
No Further Action
In a 'civilised world', a country that is considered to have moral stances, it is expected that if you do someone hurt or wrong someone, the polite and correct thing should be to automatic redress. In its simplest terms an apology or where appropriated to financially recompense for losses incurred by the individual.

The Carl Beech trial has exploded any myth about the 'correctness' of Police behaviour. It has shown how they can with ease perpetrate harm on people. If there was to be any appropriate time to put pressure on the Police service it is now, whilst the spotlight is on them.

It's OK for those, and their families, who were caught up in the false allegations of Carl Beech, to express their feelings publicly, but I feel they will ignore the richer resource of you and me and our stories if we don't enter the affray.For me this could be a wasted opportunity to expose issues like the lack of apology, the true 'lessons they need to learn', compensation for loss of earnings issues, the lack of empathy within society and from professionals towards us, if I don't throw my hat into the arena. But without us all writing to as many Politicians, the media, organisations, Cliff Richard, Paul Gambacinni, the Queen . . . . .and ' uncle Tom Cobley and all', then we are, each and every one of us, alone with this.
 

Patrick

Barman
Staff member
Verified
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
529
Reaction score
437
Location
Gloucestershire
Status
Acquitted
I have written to the Guardian today - touching on this topic
see separate thread in this section.
 

charley

Regular
Verified
Joined
Dec 20, 2018
Messages
28
Reaction score
29
Status
Other
i completly agree with the statement. nine weeks since my farce of a trial i feel at a loss as to what i can do next. talking to my wife we are angry and baffled as to why the trial ever came about in the first place. there as been no feed back as to the results of the trial. as my accuser received any compensation? have the police looked into her false claims?
a meeting with my mp resulted in the fact that parliament is in complete disarray and she may well be out of a job.
unless a person is high profile our story is lost in the chaff.

regards pete.
 

millroly

Patron
Verified
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
89
Reaction score
43
Location
the Exeter Area
Status
No Further Action
I have found that my MP was great for chasing up an outstanding benefit issue and good at passing my letters onto the appropriate minister, when I could not get an answer through 'Google', but sadly will not really enter into the affray about my arrest. It has not stopped me pestering him. It is understandable that parliament does not want to be seen as interfering with Police operational issues, as this would compromise judicial independence.

The former IPCC (Independent Police Complaints Commission), re-branded (because the public had lost faith in it) to the new IOPC (Independent Office for Police Conduct), has resulted with a lock out to the public, when it comes to complaints. Changes in the rules only allow for complaints to be directly handled by the local 'nick', often the officers who were involved are answering complaints levied against themselves. The 'institution will protect the institution' through whatever skulduggery it can muster.

(I don't often give credence to my nemisis, but for today I will do so). When someone makes a 'false allegation', it needs to be proven in court that it was a 'malicious act' from a person of sound mind, (maybe to waste public money in the case of involving the Police) . The Carl Beech trial was mostly hinged on the clear fraud he perpetrated and the false allegations, he put into the public domain, became secondary charges. The court could not accept his mitigation that he was a 'troubled' mind. In so many cases the 'troubled mind' argument is used and literally gives the individual the 'get out of jail free' card. i.e. "I did it because, I was so depressed" and the psychiatrists (who are easily manipulated in my mind) agree with the person making the false allegations.

A twist in the argument. I was putting together my own case for perusing the Police, through civil action, and hit a brick wall with a series of questions from the barrister who was supporting me, "How do we know the state of mind of the officer on the day? Was he of 'sound' judgement on the day?" How on earth could I prove, either way, what his emotional state was on the day he called for my arrest? Potentially a court would expect me to prove that his actions were malicious and intended to cause harm.
 
Last edited:

Patrick

Barman
Staff member
Verified
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
529
Reaction score
437
Location
Gloucestershire
Status
Acquitted
MPs vary a great deal - but generally they will only "assist" in our types of cases where there is some obvious procedural mistake that - for example" has caused atypical time delays ( and typically from initial arrest/voluntary interview to trial is somewhere between 16 and 30 months).

For an MP to pick up the challenge on the actual miscarriage of justice involving the police misconduct - all you will get is support in going through the bureaucratic process and then possible actual action (rare) if the police flout the process (common).

Unfortunately of course we now have a government that would rather wave kippers in the air than do any real work. and a PM whose interventions to try and assist justice you really wouldn't want as they might well lead to a long term in prison.
 
Top