|
|
Post by kruger on Nov 7, 2022 21:42:54 GMT
done to death boring as hell I know. It's very tedious. agreed |
|
|
|
Post by bs10er on Nov 7, 2022 23:04:18 GMT
It really is time to delete this thread! PLEASE!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by SleepyGas on May 15, 2024 19:18:05 GMT
It really is time to delete this thread! PLEASE!!!! Well.... www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c90z0k97n93o" Calls for Joey Barton domestic abuse trial to resume
Prosecutors have asked judges to order that the trial of former footballer Joey Barton over domestic abuse allegations should resume.
Criminal proceedings against him were paused in October 2022.
Mr Barton was accused of assaulting his wife Georgia in a drunken row but the case was adjourned after Ms Barton retracted her allegations.
The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is now appealing against the decision at the High Court in London.
Mr Barton, who played for teams including Manchester City, Newcastle United and French side Marseille during his career, was manager of Bristol Rovers at the time of the trial and alleged assault.
'Golf ball-sized bruise'
He was accused of grabbing his wife by the throat and kicking her in the head during a row outside their home in Kew, south-west London, where they had been with two other couples on 2 June 2021.
He denied a charge of assault by beating after Ms Barton was allegedly left with a golf ball-sized bruise on her forehead and a bleeding nose.
But Wimbledon Magistrates' Court heard in March 2022 that Ms Barton wrote to prosecutors a month before the scheduled trial to claim that she was injured accidentally when friends intervened in an argument between the pair, having both drunk "four or five bottles of wine".
She was not due to be called as a prosecution witness during the trial over fears she would give an untruthful account of events, but lawyers for Mr Barton said that this would leave him at a disadvantage as it meant she could not be questioned over inconsistencies in her evidence.
Fair trial 'possible'
District Judge Andrew Sweet adjourned the case and paused criminal proceedings in October 2022, claiming it would "be unfair for Mr Barton to be tried".
However, barristers are now saying a fair trial is "possible".
Tom Little KC, representing the DPP, said that pausing proceedings was a "last resort" and the case should be allowed to resume.
Simon Csoka KC, representing the former footballer, said prosecutors made a "deliberate decision" to ask police not to speak to Ms Barton about her evidence and that refusing to interview or call her as a witness was an "unfair tactic".
But, Tom Little KC, representing the DPP, said in written submissions: "The prosecution, consistent with its policy on prosecuting domestic abuse cases, had to strike a sensitive and careful balance between the expressed interests of Georgia Barton and the public interest in prosecuting cases of alleged domestic violence."
Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Saini will give their judgment at a later date." |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 15, 2024 19:47:49 GMT
More waste of tax payers money? How can a trial proceed when the main, and only?, witness has withdrawn her allegations? Perhaps JB has rattled the wrong cage with his recent X/formally Twitter, rants as it's odd the CPS have waited so long?
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 15, 2024 20:10:02 GMT
More waste of tax payers money? How can a trial proceed when the main, and only?, witness has withdrawn her allegations? Perhaps JB has rattled the wrong cage with his recent X/formally Twitter, rants as it's odd the CPS have waited so long? The law isn’t equal. He’s a celebrity and they are desperate for their show trial - similar cases without the celebrity involvement would have been long forgotten. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on May 15, 2024 21:02:34 GMT
More waste of tax payers money? How can a trial proceed when the main, and only?, witness has withdrawn her allegations? Perhaps JB has rattled the wrong cage with his recent X/formally Twitter, rants as it's odd the CPS have waited so long? Is it a waste of money? If someone assaults their wife (or anybody else) and the victim decides to withdraw any allegations, shouldn't the perpetrator still be held to account, if the police and CPS feel there is sufficient evidence that an assault took place? People withdraw allegations for a number of reasons, especially within a marriage, but a crime is a crime. If the CPS feel that this case meets those criteria then it should be resumed. Imagine how you'd feel if you had a married daughter who was beaten up, but she withdrew her evidence because of some misplaced sense of loyalty. Anyway we shall see. Agree with you about the strange timing though. As you say, maybe he's rattled too many cages. He seems to think he can say and do whatever he wants. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 15, 2024 21:27:50 GMT
More waste of tax payers money? How can a trial proceed when the main, and only?, witness has withdrawn her allegations? Perhaps JB has rattled the wrong cage with his recent X/formally Twitter, rants as it's odd the CPS have waited so long? Is it a waste of money? If someone assaults their wife (or anybody else) and the victim decides to withdraw any allegations, shouldn't the perpetrator still be held to account, if the police and CPS feel there is sufficient evidence that an assault took place? People withdraw allegations for a number of reasons, especially within a marriage, but a crime is a crime. If the CPS feel that this case meets those criteria then it should be resumed. Imagine how you'd feel if you had a married daughter who was beaten up, but she withdrew her evidence because of some misplaced sense of loyalty. Anyway we shall see. Agree with you about the strange timing though. As you say, maybe he's rattled too many cages. He seems to think he can say and do whatever he wants. My comments about waste of money were mainly regarding the length of time it's taken, as if the CPS felt they had a good case then surely they'd have the courts to review the case in 2022, it also seems unlikely in my view that the case can still proceed if Mrs B is going to suggest the assault never occurred. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 15, 2024 21:29:04 GMT
More waste of tax payers money? How can a trial proceed when the main, and only?, witness has withdrawn her allegations? Perhaps JB has rattled the wrong cage with his recent X/formally Twitter, rants as it's odd the CPS have waited so long? Is it a waste of money? If someone assaults their wife (or anybody else) and the victim decides to withdraw any allegations, shouldn't the perpetrator still be held to account, if the police and CPS feel there is sufficient evidence that an assault took place? People withdraw allegations for a number of reasons, especially within a marriage, but a crime is a crime. If the CPS feel that this case meets those criteria then it should be resumed. Imagine how you'd feel if you had a married daughter who was beaten up, but she withdrew her evidence because of some misplaced sense of loyalty. Anyway we shall see. Agree with you about the strange timing though. As you say, maybe he's rattled too many cages. He seems to think he can say and do whatever he wants. There has to be consistency. The same summer as the JB incident there was a documentary running (I think it was Inside the Force) and the police were called to a domestic incident playing out in a busy city centre and being monitored by cctv operators. The police arrived and the lady was unconscious on the floor - the footage showed her boyfriend (who had numerous domestic violence convictions) had punched her to the ground and then knocked her out with a full blooded kick to the head. The police wanted to proceed even though the victim didn’t want to press charges - they were very angry that CPS policy at the time was it should be dropped despite the most comprehensive set of evidence you could wish for. If I were JB I would ask why the policy that was in place at the time didn’t apply to him too? The only conclusion must be that a celebrity gets treated differently and more harshly. |
|
|
|
Post by popuppirate on May 15, 2024 22:43:57 GMT
Is it a waste of money? If someone assaults their wife (or anybody else) and the victim decides to withdraw any allegations, shouldn't the perpetrator still be held to account, if the police and CPS feel there is sufficient evidence that an assault took place? People withdraw allegations for a number of reasons, especially within a marriage, but a crime is a crime. If the CPS feel that this case meets those criteria then it should be resumed. Imagine how you'd feel if you had a married daughter who was beaten up, but she withdrew her evidence because of some misplaced sense of loyalty. Anyway we shall see. Agree with you about the strange timing though. As you say, maybe he's rattled too many cages. He seems to think he can say and do whatever he wants. There has to be consistency. The same summer as the JB incident there was a documentary running (I think it was Inside the Force) and the police were called to a domestic incident playing out in a busy city centre and being monitored by cctv operators. The police arrived and the lady was unconscious on the floor - the footage showed her boyfriend (who had numerous domestic violence convictions) had punched her to the ground and then knocked her out with a full blooded kick to the head. The police wanted to proceed even though the victim didn’t want to press charges - they were very angry that CPS policy at the time was it should be dropped despite the most comprehensive set of evidence you could wish for. If I were JB I would ask why the policy that was in place at the time didn’t apply to him too? The only conclusion must be that a celebrity gets treated differently and more harshly. Perhaps they should be treated more harshly though ? Maybe. 'Celebrities' have influence and with that should come with some responsibility. Let's face it, someone like Barton has the access to and the means to receive the legal defence most couldn't afford, so if this evens things up a bit then so be it. Mind you, that might not be the case for much longer, according to some: |
|
|
|
Post by devonwhite9 on May 15, 2024 23:28:56 GMT
Is it a waste of money? If someone assaults their wife (or anybody else) and the victim decides to withdraw any allegations, shouldn't the perpetrator still be held to account, if the police and CPS feel there is sufficient evidence that an assault took place? People withdraw allegations for a number of reasons, especially within a marriage, but a crime is a crime. If the CPS feel that this case meets those criteria then it should be resumed. Imagine how you'd feel if you had a married daughter who was beaten up, but she withdrew her evidence because of some misplaced sense of loyalty. Anyway we shall see. Agree with you about the strange timing though. As you say, maybe he's rattled too many cages. He seems to think he can say and do whatever he wants. There has to be consistency. The same summer as the JB incident there was a documentary running (I think it was Inside the Force) and the police were called to a domestic incident playing out in a busy city centre and being monitored by cctv operators. The police arrived and the lady was unconscious on the floor - the footage showed her boyfriend (who had numerous domestic violence convictions) had punched her to the ground and then knocked her out with a full blooded kick to the head. The police wanted to proceed even though the victim didn’t want to press charges - they were very angry that CPS policy at the time was it should be dropped despite the most comprehensive set of evidence you could wish for. If I were JB I would ask why the policy that was in place at the time didn’t apply to him too? The only conclusion must be that a celebrity gets treated differently and more harshly. So in the name of consistency you think JB should be let off or than the bloke on TV be charged? |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 16, 2024 7:08:06 GMT
Is it a waste of money? If someone assaults their wife (or anybody else) and the victim decides to withdraw any allegations, shouldn't the perpetrator still be held to account, if the police and CPS feel there is sufficient evidence that an assault took place? People withdraw allegations for a number of reasons, especially within a marriage, but a crime is a crime. If the CPS feel that this case meets those criteria then it should be resumed. Imagine how you'd feel if you had a married daughter who was beaten up, but she withdrew her evidence because of some misplaced sense of loyalty. Anyway we shall see. Agree with you about the strange timing though. As you say, maybe he's rattled too many cages. He seems to think he can say and do whatever he wants. There has to be consistency. The same summer as the JB incident there was a documentary running (I think it was Inside the Force) and the police were called to a domestic incident playing out in a busy city centre and being monitored by cctv operators. The police arrived and the lady was unconscious on the floor - the footage showed her boyfriend (who had numerous domestic violence convictions) had punched her to the ground and then knocked her out with a full blooded kick to the head. The police wanted to proceed even though the victim didn’t want to press charges - they were very angry that CPS policy at the time was it should be dropped despite the most comprehensive set of evidence you could wish for. If I were JB I would ask why the policy that was in place at the time didn’t apply to him too? The only conclusion must be that a celebrity gets treated differently and more harshly. Mrs B initially gave a statement blaming JB, the woman on the CCTV didn't, I assume there has to be some kind of allegation from a victim before a prosecution can be brought in the UK? |
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 16, 2024 11:13:14 GMT
There has to be consistency. The same summer as the JB incident there was a documentary running (I think it was Inside the Force) and the police were called to a domestic incident playing out in a busy city centre and being monitored by cctv operators. The police arrived and the lady was unconscious on the floor - the footage showed her boyfriend (who had numerous domestic violence convictions) had punched her to the ground and then knocked her out with a full blooded kick to the head. The police wanted to proceed even though the victim didn’t want to press charges - they were very angry that CPS policy at the time was it should be dropped despite the most comprehensive set of evidence you could wish for. If I were JB I would ask why the policy that was in place at the time didn’t apply to him too? The only conclusion must be that a celebrity gets treated differently and more harshly. Mrs B initially gave a statement blaming JB, the woman on the CCTV didn't, I assume there has to be some kind of allegation from a victim before a prosecution can be brought in the UK? The Police in the cctv case wanted to pursue (as a victimless prosecution I guess?) and the law allowed them to do so. It was the CPS who were operating under a policy they themselves introduced - I think in that one it was because there hadn’t been a domestic conviction with X years and that was the reason why it wasn’t pursued. Absolutely scandalous and terrible PR for the British justice system when you have clear as day footage of a female having her head kicked in being shown on prime tv and nothing being done about it. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on May 16, 2024 11:20:28 GMT
There has to be consistency. The same summer as the JB incident there was a documentary running (I think it was Inside the Force) and the police were called to a domestic incident playing out in a busy city centre and being monitored by cctv operators. The police arrived and the lady was unconscious on the floor - the footage showed her boyfriend (who had numerous domestic violence convictions) had punched her to the ground and then knocked her out with a full blooded kick to the head. The police wanted to proceed even though the victim didn’t want to press charges - they were very angry that CPS policy at the time was it should be dropped despite the most comprehensive set of evidence you could wish for. If I were JB I would ask why the policy that was in place at the time didn’t apply to him too? The only conclusion must be that a celebrity gets treated differently and more harshly. So in the name of consistency you think JB should be let off or than the bloke on TV be charged? Both cases needed investigating and the evidence should be the deciding factor in whether the CPS go ahead with a prosecution. In JB’s case the only evidence was coming from an alleged victim who didn’t want to go to court whereas the other had clear video footage of the whole incident. Both these cases took place in the same summer and if the CPS were operating under their own ridiculous policy it seems absurd that they wanted to pursue the one with no evidence (but involved a celebrity) but chose to let off the repeatedly proven domestic abuser who was caught red handed on camera. |
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on May 16, 2024 11:24:54 GMT
Wow, this guy seems like a real jerk.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on May 16, 2024 15:15:08 GMT
Wow, this guy seems like a real jerk. You need to stop looking in the mirror when you post on here!  |
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on May 16, 2024 15:16:27 GMT
Wow, this guy seems like a real jerk. You need to stop looking in the mirror when you post on here! I refute that I seem like one. I own it. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 16, 2024 16:22:09 GMT
Mrs B initially gave a statement blaming JB, the woman on the CCTV didn't, I assume there has to be some kind of allegation from a victim before a prosecution can be brought in the UK? The Police in the cctv case wanted to pursue (as a victimless prosecution I guess?) and the law allowed them to do so. It was the CPS who were operating under a policy they themselves introduced - I think in that one it was because there hadn’t been a domestic conviction with X years and that was the reason why it wasn’t pursued. Absolutely scandalous and terrible PR for the British justice system when you have clear as day footage of a female having her head kicked in being shown on prime tv and nothing being done about it. I guess on the flip side when the CPS did pursue a case where they had a clear statement from the victim the judge decided personally that JB couldn't have a fair trial rather than let the jury(?) make their own decision once they had heard all the evidence. If the JB case ever did proceed to a trial it would be interesting to see how Mrs B explained away the statement she apparently made at the scene on the PC's video cams. |
|
|
|
Post by SleepyGas on May 16, 2024 16:40:34 GMT
The Police in the cctv case wanted to pursue (as a victimless prosecution I guess?) and the law allowed them to do so. It was the CPS who were operating under a policy they themselves introduced - I think in that one it was because there hadn’t been a domestic conviction with X years and that was the reason why it wasn’t pursued. Absolutely scandalous and terrible PR for the British justice system when you have clear as day footage of a female having her head kicked in being shown on prime tv and nothing being done about it. I guess on the flip side when the CPS did pursue a case where they had a clear statement from the victim the judge decided personally that JB couldn't have a fair trial rather than let the jury(?) make their own decision once they had heard all the evidence. If the JB case ever did proceed to a trial it would be interesting to see how Mrs B explained away the statement she apparently made at the scene on the PC's video cams. She was either lying then or lying now. Put her on the stand and then charge her for perverting the course of justice...? |
|
|
|
Post by RD on May 16, 2024 17:32:23 GMT
I guess on the flip side when the CPS did pursue a case where they had a clear statement from the victim the judge decided personally that JB couldn't have a fair trial rather than let the jury(?) make their own decision once they had heard all the evidence. If the JB case ever did proceed to a trial it would be interesting to see how Mrs B explained away the statement she apparently made at the scene on the PC's video cams. She was either lying then or lying now. Put her on the stand and then charge her for perverting the course of justice...? Yep. She was the one who called the police ffs!!! Then they turn up and she's got a golf ball sized lump on her head!!! He's obviously guilty ffs |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 16, 2024 18:00:34 GMT
I guess on the flip side when the CPS did pursue a case where they had a clear statement from the victim the judge decided personally that JB couldn't have a fair trial rather than let the jury(?) make their own decision once they had heard all the evidence. If the JB case ever did proceed to a trial it would be interesting to see how Mrs B explained away the statement she apparently made at the scene on the PC's video cams. She was either lying then or lying now. Put her on the stand and then charge her for perverting the course of justice...? That's really going to make any future victims come forwards when they suffer domestic violence!! |
|
