Joe. without any phsyical evidence how can a jury find him gulity ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ then?
(At the risk of being abused for being a former Police Officer).
Like everyone else here I do not know what evidence was available in that case. However, the CPS (of whom I have little experience, as I retired just after they were 'invented' and of whom I even less respect) decided, I am sure on advice from a QC, that there was enough evidence upon which a jury could convict and it was for that reason they prosecuted.
That's the ‘official answer'. However I have a gut feeling that they will probably prosecute in similar cases where they have practically no evidence so show they are not biased ! They do the same when a police officer is accused. “Give it a run” as they say. The officer who pushed the paper seller, who then died of a heart attack (natural causes) was a case in point. He was acquitted and probably would not have been prosecuted if he had been anybody but a police officer.
In the case in which the broadcaster pleaded guilty. I suspect there might have been evidence of similar acts using the same MO, by girls who were unconnected with each other. A jury could in such a case might decide that a number of girls would be unable to tell the same story if it wasn’t true. That might mean 'no reasonable doubt'. Just an opinion, based on experience not facts.
Quote Reply
Originally Posted by johncar54
