So many lies

[Rights Fighter]

I know of a case where a text message where the def is supposed to have admitted guilt was put into the evidence during the course of the trial. Not only that, it was not listed as an exhibit.

The trial was ongoing, one complainant witness mentioned a text message that the def is supposed to have sent to her. Judge asks "where is this text message?"

OIC jumps up from the public gallery "I just happen to have a copy of it in my pocket".

He said he made a hand written copy as he could not retrieve it from the phone. Def counsel turned to the def and said, without looking at the [supposed] text message "do you want to allow this in?" Def said "I've got nothing to hide, yes".

So the scrappy piece of paper the copy was written on was quickly made NAE - Notice of Additional Evidence. When it was read out, the def said "that's a load of rubbish". Trouble is the cat was out of the bag. He denied sending that particular message but it was too late.

Trying to appeal via CCRC on that. At the moment they have rejected that ground........ Why the OIC did not take a photograph of that supposed text message rather than "copying it" is anyone's guess. Well actually no it's not. He was very friendly with that complainant........

[farmer42]

And to think Britain is supposed to pride it self on a fair trial, it is what makes it so scary and hard is its not you against the accuser its you against the whole law enforcement they want a conviction regardless of innocence.

They have also put in a bad character application they want to be able to tell the jury she has made these allegations against me before but they were NFA they think by doing that it will justify why she waited so long to report the second alleged rape because she says she was scared she would not be believed again. What’s worse is they never pursued the first time as there was no evidence no DNA nothing because it never happened and yet they still managing to use this against me.

[vvnn8]

I know of a case where a text message where the def is supposed to have admitted guilt was put into the evidence during the course of the trial. Not only that, it was not listed as an exhibit.

The trial was ongoing, one complainant witness mentioned a text message that the def is supposed to have sent to her. Judge asks "where is this text message?"

OIC jumps up from the public gallery "I just happen to have a copy of it in my pocket".

He said he made a hand written copy as he could not retrieve it from the phone. Def counsel turned to the def and said, without looking at the [supposed] text message "do you want to allow this in?" Def said "I've got nothing to hide, yes".

So the scrappy piece of paper the copy was written on was quickly made NAE - Notice of Additional Evidence. When it was read out, the def said "that's a load of rubbish". Trouble is the cat was out of the bag. He denied sending that particular message but it was too late.

Trying to appeal via CCRC on that. At the moment they have rejected that ground........ Why the OIC did not take a photograph of that supposed text message rather than "copying it" is anyone's guess. Well actually no it's not. He was very friendly with that complainant........

RF You have some really scary stories about trials. OMG ... Good to know ...

[Rights Fighter]

People facing trial need to know the dirty tricks that can be played out during the court of the trial. Some sols and barristers deny this sort of thing happens, until it happens on their watch....

[vvnn8]

People facing trial need to know the dirty tricks that can be played out during the court of the trial. Some sols and barristers deny this sort of thing happens, until it happens on their watch....

Very thankful to have you here...