Dogs Sleeping Forum

Ali wrote:
Postponing the case would have just prolonged the agony to be fair.

And arresting this poor woman deepened the agony. So not only did the judges stance cause further distress and agony, it resulted in sending a message that 'we (the courts) are hostile to domestic violence victims'

As the women said ‘Why would any ­woman go to the authorities and ask for help when they have to go through that?’

wutang wrote:

Ali wrote:
Postponing the case would have just prolonged the agony to be fair.

And arresting this poor woman deepened the agony. So not only did the judges stance cause further distress and agony, it resulted in sending a message that 'we (the courts) are hostile to domestic violence victims'

As the women said ‘Why would any ­woman go to the authorities and ask for help when they have to go through that?’

No Wutang, putting emotion aside here, the courts are hostile to people who are in contempt of it, which she was twice.

The problem is as I see it Wutang, how do we maintain the innocent until proven guilty ethos of this country without the victim of a crime being subjected to court and the questioning that goes with it.

The defendent is not guilty of anything until judgement is passed, so with that in mind how do we maintain the rights of both defendent and victim in the judicial process?

look at what was done to her
she deserved some fucking leeway
i think the judge got it badly wrong
and the girl should be compensated
its like she got stabbed twice
once in the stomach and once in the back

Big Fat Frosty wrote:look at what was done to her
she deserved some fucking leeway
i think the judge got it badly wrong
and the girl should be compensated
its like she got stabbed twice
once in the stomach and once in the back

Frank, I am not saying that what happened to her was nice but that guy could have walked without any jail time at all.

But it still doesn't change the fact that until found guilty he was presumed to be innocent of any crime.

It might be a horrible thought and seem all arse about face but he has to be proven guilty by the victim. The onus is on her to prove his guilt not on him to prove his innocence.

She would have known she was obliged to attend court and she didn't, even after a warrant had been served she still didn't turn up. Given the legalities of the justice system, what was the judge to do but to find her in contempt of court.

Ali wrote:The problem is as I see it Wutang, how do we maintain the innocent until proven guilty ethos of this country without the victim of a crime being subjected to court and the questioning that goes with it.

But she had already taken to the stand once, and testified over two days, but because the Judge fell ill she was forced to go through the whole thing again. My point was the Judge could have shown leniency, understanding, and a whole bunch of common sense, after what she had been through. After all he fell ill so the trial has to be re-done, it wasnt her fault, but to jail her, and then threaten her with months of imprisonment (as well as taking her kids into care) is a staggering lack of concern for her well being.

Contempt of court... this Judge and the court he represents deserves nothing but contempt.

Oh my god that poor woman. The problem is her former boyfriend would be let out after serving half his sentence, so she was probably scared he would come after her.

I agree with Frosty. The judge was wrong to jail her. Her injuries were enough to send him down without her having to give evidence.

wutang wrote:

Ali wrote:The problem is as I see it Wutang, how do we maintain the innocent until proven guilty ethos of this country without the victim of a crime being subjected to court and the questioning that goes with it.

But she had already taken to the stand once, and testified over two days, but because the Judge fell ill she was forced to go through the whole thing again. My point was the Judge could have shown leniency, understanding, and a whole bunch of common sense, after what she had been through. After all he fell ill so the trial has to be re-done, it wasnt her fault, but to jail her, and then threaten her with months of imprisonment (as well as taking her kids into care) is a staggering lack of concern for her well being.

Contempt of court... this Judge and the court he represents deserves nothing but contempt.

Too right Wutang

wutang wrote:

Ali wrote:The problem is as I see it Wutang, how do we maintain the innocent until proven guilty ethos of this country without the victim of a crime being subjected to court and the questioning that goes with it.

But she had already taken to the stand once, and testified over two days, but because the Judge fell ill she was forced to go through the whole thing again. My point was the Judge could have shown leniency, understanding, and a whole bunch of common sense, after what she had been through. After all he fell ill so the trial has to be re-done, it wasnt her fault, but to jail her, and then threaten her with months of imprisonment (as well as taking her kids into care) is a staggering lack of concern for her well being.

Contempt of court... this Judge and the court he represents deserves nothing but contempt.

I'm not saying it was her fault, but because of what happened he was still innocent and she still had to prove his guilt.

I feel for what happened to her, I really do, but she was in contempt of court which is an offence in itself.

Ali wrote:I feel for what happened to her, I really do, but she was in contempt of court which is an offence in itself.

Are you telling me that the Judge had no chocie but to jail her for a week!! then say if you dont take the stand I will jail you for months and put your kids in care???? If the judge was prevented from taking a more lenient approach - as in 'normally I would jail your a$$ for a week, but taking into account the trauma and pyschological distress you are going through I wont' - then this needs changing because such a system is fucked up and deserves contempt.

And I dont see how this automatically equals 'the defendent is guilty, jail the bastard'.

Wu, he didn't jail her because she didn't turn up once, he jailed her after she didn't turn up the second time even after saying she would.


I bet the whole debacle gave the defendant a great laugh.

Ali wrote:Wu, he didn't jail her because she didn't turn up once, he jailed her after she didn't turn up the second time even after saying she would.

And the reason she didnt turn up the second time (which was the next day) was for the same reason she didnt turn up the first time - the trauma and distress she was going through. Its doesnt take an idiot to say 'this woman is in distress lets not make this worse by jailing her for a week. Lets show some fucking humanity on this one'.

Ali wrote:I bet the whole debacle gave the defendant a great laugh

So not only is the victim at fault for being pyschologically scared, distressed, and feeling unable to take the stand, after a horrific injury, but she is guilty of giving the attacker a laugh. Talk about victim blaming.

But the defendents biggest laugh was for the 15month sentence!!!!!!!! this after blagging his way through one trial, and attempted to do the same in the second (until this brave woman decided to take the stand) with the defense 'this bitch stabbed herself', before turning round and saying' LOL, only joking. I plunged that knife into her. 'Unlawful wounding' your honour'. Not much contempt there I see. What Judge gave that sentence - when he could have dished out 5 years? oh yeah the same one who jailed this woman for contempt

She ought to have obtained a doctor's letter certifying her as unfit to testify, then she wouldn't have been found in contempt.

Over here, at least in Texas, there is no need for the woman to press charges, or testify. Ever since OJ, we have changed our laws. Woman can't drop charges, and the case goes on, regardless of if the woman wants it to, or shows up in court. That's because some woman don't want their boyfriend/husband prosecuted, and others are scared to death of him. This would have been a slam dunk case, whether she testified or not. Attempted murder, would get you a nice long spell in Huntsville.

Maddog wrote:Over here, at least in Texas, there is no need for the woman to press charges, or testify. Ever since OJ, we have changed our laws. Woman can't drop charges, and the case goes on, regardless of if the woman wants it to, or shows up in court. That's because some woman don't want their boyfriend/husband prosecuted, and others are scared to death of him. This would have been a slam dunk case, whether she testified or not. Attempted murder, would get you a nice long spell in Huntsville.

In England and Wales, the Crown Prosecution Service brings the case, she didn't press charges.

i might not like americas drug laws or there politics
but least you take no fucking chances with violent wankers like this guy
attempted murder is fucking spot on
this cunt got a right fucking result 15months its fucking laffable