Is this the case for the defence ?
A girl who claims Coronation Street star Michael Le Vell raped her as she clutched her favourite teddy bear was today accused of lying to police to make her story ‘sound more convincing’, a court heard.
The alleged victim told Manchester Crown Court that the 48-year-old TV star always abused her in the early hours of the morning.
Le Vell has played garage mechanic Kevin Webster in the ITV1 soap for 30 years, and is facing a total of 12 sex charges.
He is accused of five counts of rape, three of indecent assault, two counts of sexual activity with a child and two of causing a child to engage in sexual activity. He denies all the charges.
Yesterday Manchester Crown Court heard he raped a young girl in her bed after covering her mouth with her favourite teddy bear.
Today Alisdair Williamson, defending Le Vell, questioned alleged inconsistencies about what time the girl had told police she had been abused.
theneedleblog 
It’s a myth that all lies are exposed eventually. Many are, but not all. It’s simply ludicrous and illogical to believe that truth will always out. It’s an emotive claim, not a logical one.
People’s ‘stories’ change. Sometimes because it’s a lie, sometimes because their memory is clouded. It can happen. That’s the danger. Making mistakes in your testimony, or remembering new stuff, or even changing the story doesn’t necessarily make something a lie.
Of course, we must be careful of not discussing this particular case especially, we’ve moved on to abstract arguments here right?
If people want to use the term ‘fact’ – then I’ll explain some:
1) Any court makes decisions based on the evidence.The evidence can sometimes be very convincing (but a lie). Sometimes it be convincing but wrong (scientific flaw, or expert opinion). Sometimes the evidence was completely accurate, but new evidence arrives later that changes everything.
2) The verdict reached does not equate to ‘truth’. It equates to a judgment made at a point in time based on what evidence was available. Usually we like to think this a fair and just process, but accept that it’s not perfect and mistakes can be (and are) made.
3) When a person is found guilty (or not guilty), it does not mean that everything they said and did was true / innocent / lies / wrong. Nor does it mean the other part was a liar or a truth teller. It simply means that the evidence led to a decision. Of course, generally it implies that one person was believed and the other not (most likely influenced by corroborating evidence, but not always).
4) There are number of cases where courts convicted (or acquitted) people on convincing evidence (no ‘fitting up’), but were later found to be incorrect (according to new evidence).
The FACT is, we never really know the truth. We make judgments. We ‘prove’ things based on what we know so far, and we should always be mindful of the possibility of new evidence in the future. Even the most compelling ‘shotgun in hand’ scenarios can turn out to be something other than we’d imagined.
The best we can ever hope for is that everybody in the system does their job to the best of their ability, and we continually strive for higher standards. Gathering evidence impartially and presenting it impartially too. The jury too much have open minds and be open to all possibilities.
In the end though, we’re counting on 12 fairly random people assessing sometimes complex evidence (and trusting in the opinions of those providing it). They make mistakes.
It’s terrible that innocent people are accused falsely (and sometimes convicted as a result).
It’s terrible that guilty people are acquitted.
I’ve read all comments with interest and think the above comments
“The Brilliant Mistake” just about sums up my feelings on the same matters very accurately. During the 50’s & 60’s I spent several years in Quarrier’s Homes Orphanage and yes like many institutionalised children I suffered and survived heinous abuses. As a young victim I believe shame was my middle name and kept the secret of my abuse silent for many, many years. That is until 1996 when I made formal complaint both to the police & Quarrier’s instant reaction was to once again isolate me by saying I was the only person who had ever made an accusation of abuse against them. All very strange particularly as several later there was a media frenzy regarding many, many serious abuses having taken place in Quarrier’s spanning more than 30 years! At this point I would thank Greenock Police loudly, they took my statements very seriously and indeed started prompt investigation…..however and it’s a great big unsavoury however…..”Colin Boyd” the then “Procurator Fiscal” made what I believe was the greatest mistake of his career and in the process crapped all over what most folk would perceive as access to natural justice…The politically smart but spiritually dim witted Colin Boyd made a decision that too much time had passed and immediately put a stop to further investigation into very serious crimes against vulnerable children during the 50’s & 60’s. As a very real victim of serious abuse I will never ever (and I’m certainly getting on a bit) give up on attempting to access my right to justice….and neither should any other victim. Notably anyone making false allegations should face a hefty prison sentence, I’ve little time for liars & miscreants including the ones in power. Sorry just another wee point why are Scottish solicitors so reticent at taking on child abuse cases against the government, such timidity from the land of the brave….?
Hi Jan
I hope you’ve contacted the police in the last year as you will be taken more seriously in the new post Savile climate.
I just wonder if you’d like to write a longer piece in a similar vein for the main blog ?
It would be good to highlight Quarriers and you write very well.
Its a fact if your story is a lie then the lie will show itself eventually !! If the girl was telling the truth then why did her story change ? from The police station to the court room her story differed 4 times ? Also before reporting the lie to the police the girl visited a life coach who strangely enough said he had been a victim of child abuse from the ages of 6 to 14 and his life was now great …
I think some on here need to know what it feels like to be accused of something terrible like this knowing its a lie and i feel your feeling toward the alleged victim who was lying might be slightly different…
Its also terrible for the bloody victims who have to live with the harm thats been done to them who have lived with that for many years or has that ben forgotten about?….
Its more than terrible for real victims of abuse i agree but that girls wasn’t a victim of abuse at all !! All she has done is damage what is a fragile enough system and has possibly damaged justice being done when victims of abuse by high profile people report it to the police. Furthermore I believe she should now answer to the courts herself as lying to a court of law is a crime… isn’t it ? Or at the very least get the girl some professional help..
@steven yaeh thats right some b list celeb goes to court and some poor girl gets damaged ..yeah fine //bollocks to that..
@gojam did anyone miss this story?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-15852424
An 86-year-old man has been jailed for 30 months for indecently assaulting a 10-year-old boy 35 years ago.
Francis Cory-Wright, of Little Gaddesden, Hertfordshire, was found guilty of abusing the boy during fishing and hunting trips in the 1970s.
The victim, who is now 44, kept the abuse secret for decades for fear of his father’s reaction.
Judge Stephen Warner, at St Albans Crown Court, described Cory-Wright as “manipulative and predatory”.
During his trial, the court heard his victim had only told police about the abuse last year after his father died.
When he spoke to officers, the man said he had decided to report the abuse because it was “a piece of unfinished business”.
http://thepeerage.com/p7271.htm
Francis Newman Cory-Wright was born on 21 July 1925.1 He is the son of Ronald Cory-Wright and Geraldyn Mary Villiers-Stuart.2
He was educated at Eton College, Windsor, Berkshire, England.1 He fought in the Second World War, where he was wounded.1 He graduated from Merton College, Oxford University, Oxford, Oxfordshire, England, in 1949 with a Bachelor of Arts (B.A.).1 He graduated from Merton College, Oxford University, Oxford, Oxfordshire, England, in 1954 with a Master of Arts (M.A.).1 He gained the rank of Lieutenant in the service of the 15th/19th King’s Royal Hussars.1 He lived in 2003 at Oakridge, Little Gaddesden, Hertfordshire, England.1
Stephen, how do you know she wasn’t a victim of abuse? Lack of evidence doesn’t mean she was a liar. Nobody here knows the actual truth. You mention the fact that she visited a life coach who had a history of abuse but you don’t mention that the life coach testified that she saw the girl crying uncontrollably as she was speaking about her story. Inconsistencies in stories can also come down to memory and not necessarily due to the fact someone was lying. Personally I don’t know what to believe but I won’t trash the girl when there is no substantial evidence that nothing happened.
It is not strictly true to claim a conviction cannot occur based on an accusation alone.
It is entirely possible to be convicted on eye witness testimony of a single person alone.
Of course, some might argue that the accusation and the testimony are two different things, and often they are, but equally, they can be essentially one and the same.
The singular credible eyewitness testimony of an individual CAN be enough.
It should also be born in mind that a Jury Equity / Perverse decisions can also be made. Again, whilst rare, it’s perfectly possible that a jury go against a judge’s directions. They may even opt to ignore the law when reaching a verdict.
There are numerous cases where guilty was the only possible verdict in law, but the jury returned not guilty.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/428399/Former-Radio-One-DJ-Chris-Denning-re-arrested-by-Jimmy-Savile-detectives
Former Radio One DJ Chris Denning re-arrested by Jimmy Savile detectives
THE police squad behind the Jimmy Savile sex abuse investigation have re-arrested former Radio One DJ Chris Denning, it emerged this evening.
People should be mindful that ‘Not Guilty’ does not mean ‘the girl’ and her mother were liars. There is no evidence to suggest that.
Obviously, it’s an easy assumption to make, but an incorrect (and dangerous one).
Mr. Turner was found not guilty based on the available evidence (or lack thereof), Nobody else was on trial here, and people should not assume any prosecution was vexatious or based upon falsehoods.
We do not know if justice has prevailed, we only know the verdict. This alas, is deemed ‘justice’ until proven otherwise. Had Mr. Turner been found guilty, others may have proclaimed ‘justice has been served’ in favour of the alleged victim.
It is quite simply wrong to proclaim ‘the girl’ a liar. The court did not find that, nor was it ever intended to make a judgment on that.
Again, I reiterate, Mr. Turner was found not guilty because a jury either THOUGHT she was a liar or thought there was enough doubt. She was not proven to be one, any more than Mr. Turner was proven innocent.
another liar found out , name her immediately and take what she gets. she was obviously after money or the favourite with these pathelogical liars hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. this guys career could be ruined. who is going to be next. i can tell you this if it happened to me i would make sure her eyes never graced this planet again no matter the consequences.
The jury found LeVell not guilty, as in there was at least SOME doubt he didn’t do it, it doesn’t prove the girl was lying either. Anyone who’s read the case details can see one glaringly obvious detail as to why the child may not have been after money.
just what is this bash the victims stuff showing up on here of late..”only in it for the money” crap? wtf..silly me i thought we stood up for victims of csa..
NOT GUILTY.
Further to my original post. Not a hope of a conviction in this case and the jury came to the obvious and only verdict it could after exemplary summing up by the judge. No winner, no loser. Simply, justice has prevailed as it rightly should have. Mr Le Vell leaves court without a stain on his character.
The CPS were right to go to trial ‘In the public interest’. That phrase does not always mean to prosecute a guilty person and send them to prison. In this case, the public interest was served because it was clear that the accuser was prepared to make escalating accusations in a sustained and persistent attack on Mr Le Vell. He had a right to face his accuser in court and to be judged.
Contrary to what has been written in this blog, and which is evident in this case, an accusation alone is insufficient to secure a conviction. If it were, the courts would be working 24 hours a day and a thousand new prisons would have to be built. Accusations alone carry no weight. They must be supported with evidence, and that evidence must be weighed by a jury.
I hope that this case serves as a warning to accusers, and gives courage and determination to those accused. The media is currently riddled with salacious celebrity accusations.
@christopher qc yeah and graham ovenden was totally innocent..my arse..
Perhaps we should resort to using lie detectors for both victim and defendant when it is one word against the other. This will never happen anyway human rights would stop that in its tracks.
What must be remembered is if the victim was telling the truth then how devasted they must feel, not believed and the rest of their life feeling helpless and totally
Justice has been served! The mother and daughter should now be identified. They tried to destroy this man’s life! However, I think he can move on from this untarnished. Not so for the accusers!
whats going on with this blog -balance yeah but i detect a sort of hey lets not be cruel to paedophiles…wtf?
Regardless of who a jury ‘believes’ – it doesn’t really matter.
I may choose to believe him, I may choose to believe her. But in either case, I have to ask myself – is there reasonable doubt?
I cannot KNOW what happened between him and ‘the girl’. None of us can.
Evidence might help us to fill in some blanks, and in some cases provide a logical outcome (quite rare actually, in terms of genuine ‘logical deduction’).
In this case (and I MUST stress, based on the reports that are published), it is simply one person’s word against another, which must therefore give rise to ‘reasonable doubt’ ergo, not guilty.
However, there MAY be other evidence which hasn’t been publicised (to protect anonymity) that might tip the balance (I use the term ‘balance’ loosely, and in my opinion, things favour the defendant considerably).
It is tragic that in some cases, justice does not prevail, but the lack of evidence is a sad fact in many instances, and without evidence, there is doubt.
Testimony itself is evidence, we mustn’t forget that. But the reliability of it is questionable.
How Mr Turner looks, or behaves in public does not make him a guilty or innocent, likewise for ‘the girl’.
Regardless, this man’s reputation is tarnished, and no amount of wealth can remove the stain. Even if found not guilty, and the girl’s testimony proven to be false, the stain might diminish, but would leave a mark.
A pitiful case in every sense of the word.
Sorry, I see what you mean now, the judge said assessment of the victim is critical. He did give the jury both possibilities though, ” The judge said the jury’s assessment of the alleged victim was “critical in this case”.
He said if the Crown was right and she was a truthful witness then she was someone who was recalling traumatic events from an early age.
The other side of the coin was that she was “dishonest” and had come to court to “quite literally destroy” the life of the defendant, the court heard.”
I think his summing up, when read in its entirety, appears to steer the jury to reach a not guilty verdict. Just my view…. time will tell!
I sat on a Jury in 1999, I heard a sexual offence case, his word against hers syndrome with no evidence , he was found guilty by a majority of 11 to 12, I was the one who wouldn’t convict him , the jury was a farce, one jury member was desperate to get away to run his business, two nearly had a fight an Asian Gent cried and the others thought ” Yeah I think he did it ” so the poor lad got sent down. This is factual and really happened, British justice hey ?
That is shocking! Makes me wonder what today will bring! However, I thought the judge’s final comment as he summed the case up was very interesting ……..( accurate assessment of the alleged victim is critical to this case).
What comment are you referring too, is it when the judge said that the jury should not allow sympathy to cloud judgement? that’s all I could find. Thanks.
I await the verdict with interest. This is case whereby there is no evidence of any description. It is simply a case of who the jury believe!
Of course there is evidence, witness testimony is considered as evidence as is corroborative and circumstantial evidence.
Its her word against his, nothing more, nothing less. Its not enough to convict someone (in my humble opinion).
No one has identified the victim they have only speculated , I have done the maths and I too have a very good Idea who the alleged victim might be, my thoughts are what has the alleged victim to gain ?
If found not guilty, we will learn exactly what she felt she had to gain!
Why would one night stands be considered a ‘dark secret’ to a beer swilling blokey type such as Turner admits to being? Surely extra-marital affairs would be considered par for the course in the circumstances. In my view a ‘dark secret’ speaks of something far more sinister.
One night stands whilst your wife has cancer are not quite the same as a straight forward one night stand. I can well believe this would have eaten away at him inside. Plus I don’t know the accused, so I don’t actually feel able to claim that a string of undisclosed one night stands wouldn’t bother him!!!
I just wonder if he had no money then would all this nonsense still be happening!!I somehow doubt it.
Not Guilty. No eye witness evidence, no circumstantial evidence, no physical evidence, no forensic evidence, no corroborative evidence, and no medical evidence. Alleged victim has admitted inconsistencies in her statements. Alleged victims mother admitted that she phoned the Police to ask if she could sell the story to the media. Not a hope of a conviction. CPS went to trail to give Michael Le Vell the opportunity to bring his nightmare to an end. Well done Michael for toughing it out and standing up justice.
He has admitted lying on the childs bed then in a later interview is asked whether he did this and put his arm round the child he says ‘no, and if I did, it wasn’t under the covers’. He either did or he didn’t! As he has denied every other thing the girl has said for him to admit he lay on the bed means someone else must have seen him and he can’t possibly deny that one. Maybe that counts as circumstantial. LeVell said he was ‘disorientated’ after drinking. A blind drunk 40 something man lying on a childs bed in the early morning is a bit odd if you ask me.
As for the victims inconsistencies, it is possible to get dates wrong and not be intentionally lying. The mother wanting to sell the story does sound bad but apparently it may have been an attempt to give the police a ‘kick up the arse’ when they weren’t taking the investigation seriously the first time round. The evidence in court was also more detailed than what has been reported, the jury will be going off that. So I think guilty or aquitted is also a possibility.
Hi Maz,
I’ve not been in court and so I can’t comment on what the jury have heard that has not been reported.
If you have then please email me in complete confidence at gojam56@gmail.com
Gojam , i haven’t been in court but I did speak to someone else who was there and they said there was alot more evidence heard.
You’re not really a QC are you Christopher ? If you were you would know that people are found guilty without any of the evidence you list, on an all too frequent basis. “CPS went to trial to give MLV the opportunity to bring his nightmare to an end ” I think he would have preferred another NFA rather than going through this horrifically public spectacle when he has effectively been branded a monster.
There needs to be huge changes to how sex crimes are handled in this country. Anonymity for the accused ( what of their children ? do they not deserve to be protected ),
Abolition of the criminal injuries compensation which allows complainants to claim even when a case is NFA’d or a not guilty verdict and instead replaced with the offer of high quality counselling, so the incentive to make a false accusation cannot be compensation.
Police to properly investigate both sides of an allegation, not just build a case in an attempt to boost their own stats and promotion prospects ( this revelation has been extremely disturbing to me) rather than looking for the truth.
If lie detectors are now mandatory for sex offenders on release across the UK, give the accused the opportunity to take a test during the investigation. I have taken one and passed with flying colours, I would be more than happy to fund one for my false accuser but I somehow doubt she would take me up on that. The justice system cannot have it both ways, if polygraphs are reliable enough to gauge the intentions of convicted offenders on release then use them as a tool in investigation.
I am one very angry falsely accused person.
reddan -” people are found guilty without any of the evidence you list, on an all too frequent basis”.
Not if I’m defending them.
Completely agree with Christopher QC. He will be acquitted.
I’m glad I’m not on the jury, I’d probably find him guilty just because he seems a rather odious person outside of any allegations. I think he might get off but even if he does, he has been put through the grinder big time and he cannot possibly return to TV. His niece won millions on the Lottery and gave him a million apparently, so he won’t suffer.
Gut feeling after reading everything about this case? I would say (just my opinion-not saying it’s fact) that he has been set up big time. Its obvious to anyone with a slight interest in the case whom the alleged victim is and as such, whom her mother is. People on here are saying Michael looks “guilty”. My personal view is of a broken man who can’t believe what is happening. Whatever the outcome I hope justice is served.
i totally agree a smelly lying drunken cheater,untrustworthy philandering ,whose word can be trusted??you what ….he had the oppotunity ,he was drunk ,looks like he would poke anything
There are laws against publishing anything that might identify people as victims and these apply on social media sites, not just newspapers. I would strongly suggest that the owner of this site might want to delete some of these comments.
I’ve not allowed any comments that identify the victim.
Interesting comments during a police interview:
During the interview Le Vell said he had once lain upon a bed in which his alleged victim was sleeping. But he insisted he had done so after becoming disoriented through drink. “It was innocent,” he told Rothwell.
Rothwell asked: “Did you touch X?”
Le Vell: “No.”
Rothwell: “Did you put your arm around her?”
Le Vell: “No, and if I did I wasn’t under the sheets. It wasn’t anything sexual.”
was that said in court
Yes, the constable who arrested him read from his interview in court.
“The Coronation Street actor Michael Le Vell has acknowledged that he once got into a bed in which his alleged victim was sleeping.
But he insisted he had done so after becoming disoriented through drink. “It was innocent,” he told the officer who arrested him at his home in Hale, Cheshire, on 30 September 2011, Manchester crown court heard on Thursday.
Later in the interview Le Vell claimed not to have actually got into the girl’s bed. Instead, he said, he had simply briefly lain upon it. ”
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/05/michael-le-vell-coronation-street
hi mate, could you contact me on christopher1946@btinternet.com thanks mate.chris
This is ridiculous. His picture looks genuine and he looks a decent guy. This girls story sounds risky and dodgy and I don’t really believe it!! Why would she accuse him now!? Why not so many years back when it happened!? I think all this little-attention seeker wants is some money by accusing a normal actor who probably has never even heard of her. His career is now ruined just because of her! I thought that at the beginning he was a rapist but everyday her story gets more and more fake and especially how she wanted the newspaper to sell her story… I’ll be surprised when the court case closes and they found out who did what. If the girl is innocent then I say sorry for now. If she isn’t, how mean of her.
So she should have told someone when? 6 , 8 , 9, 12? You clearly have little understanding of the psychological effects such abuse would have and the reasons children don’t tell. Also we are not hearing the whole testimony from the victim, it’s not all published. Never mind though, he ‘looks nice’ and you’re sure she’s an attention seeker, case closed.
Just wondering why does he look genuine, how does he look decent ? Surely in a court of law it should be about facts, evidence , but in many cases of historic sexual abuse the only ” evidence” is the word of the complainant against the word of the defendant. Ask any defence lawyer who specialises in these cases and they will tell you it is basically a popularity contest between these two parties, who do the jury feel more sympathetic towards ? Therefore it is based on emotion rather than fact, or rather whose version of events the jury believe based on their emotional responses.
That is why these cases are fraught with difficulty and potentially dangerous.
i can see things that point to guilt and things that point to innocence.
Like Helen I’m wondering how does he know the girl? I’ve been trying to find that out but it’s not mentioned in any of the articles I’ve read. The girl said he would come to her at 1 and 2 am and she’s obviously in her bedroom at that time so did they share a house? He was married until 2011 so unless this mother and daughter are relatives of him or his wife and for some reason living with them for at least 9 years then I’m completely lost. The wife leaving at the same time the teen was treated for the sexual assault says a lot too. I was completely sure of his guilt at the start however I’m a bit thrown at the fact that the teen was attending a lecture where a woman talked about having being raped when she was younger and this in some way led her to become well known leading on to a modelling career.Not sure how factual that is though as it’s Le Vell’s defense who brought it up. I have a feeling we’re never going to know the truth.
Seems like all his family is supporting him but no sign of the ex and his kids. Just thinking out loud here, maybe they have been at court with him…
The woman giving the lecture said their was a girl in the audience crying. As the woman was a witness I presume it was the victim. Also I wondered why the girl was attending such a lecture
To me, thie girl sounds like shes making up a load of lies.
If i was every lying about something to my parents when i was little, i would say the same things as “all of a sudden had a flash back!”
waking up knowing fine well their there and pretending to sleep talk, or saying something sleepy and innocent “are we safe now?”
i dont think i buy this kids evidence
bu at the same time, he looks very guilty..
I agree with you Phil……do the maths!
He looks as guilty as hell!!
He is as guilty as hell!!!
i agree,if looks could kuilt..he says he laid on her bed by mistake???but did not get in as he drunkenly recoils or recalls…i have walked into the wrong bedroom ,my neighbour was very surprised
“Mother I would wash my daughter’s underwear, and at such a young age [if] this girl was sexually interfered with blood would be visable and as a Mother I would be alerted and taken to GP”. –
That’s quite a presumption to say that blood would be visible. If you read again what he is accused of doing, you can see why there may not have been any physical evidence for the mother to see.
am getting sick of this ”well they are all liars’ shit…
Nobody said they are all liars Bob, why is everything so black and white with you ? Not all complainants are genuine, the majority are, not all those accused are guilty, sometimes innocent people get locked up, sometimes guilty people go unpunished.
the fact no one else has come forward and accused him suggests to me hes innocent normally those things snowball.
I thought this is the second time he has been in court for this?
Andy
No Andy the CPS decided not to proceed after the original allegations in Sep 2011.
There could be reasons why no one else has come forward. Some men only abuse someone close to them and do not go outside their circle to offend.
Unfortunately even if La Vell is acquitted, the accusation has ruined his life.
If the girl is to be believed it seems that La Vell knew this girl very well, otherwise how would he have access to her while she was in bed in the early hours of the morning. This points to a close family member or friend of the family.
Le Vell has described the girl as a fantasiser and attention seeker. If this can be proved to be true then Le Vell will be acquitted unless there is strong evidence that the girl is being truthful.
Either way I hope justice is served one way or another.
The defence suggested today that after the CPS decided not to proceed after the initial 2011 accusations that the complainant made more serious allegations following “flashbacks”. I would expect that this in addition to the very specific times cited will form the defences rebuttal of the case. Based on the trial to date and what has been reported he will be acquitted.
the cps is there to stop money being wasted bring prosecutions that would fail whats the point of putting something before a judge or jury if you know its a dead cert they will throw it.
the cps do a hell of a lot wrong but i dont see how we could do without them.
Far too many ‘holes’ in this case and we are just in to day 2 – this girl/woman has remembered ‘foul breath and threats’ as far back as a six year old! When her soreness mentioned to her GP it was put down to: “Too much orange juice”…Hello, as Mother I would wash my daughter’s underwear, and at such a young age [if] this girl was sexually interfered with blood would be visable and as a Mother I would be alerted and taken to GP – and, what has not emerged is: how come Le Vell was around this 6yr old in the mornings (which is the time suggested of alledged attack/s?). Something seriously amiss, so time with further eveidence should explain. I say the case will crumble, but if Le Vell guilty he should serve a lenghty sentence. However, if the accuser lied she should be given a jail term.
So, it’s the mother’s fault ?
Or the girl’s fault ?
Perhaps it’s best just to let the trial go ahead ?
….or perhaps the ‘fee’ from a tabloid because wanted to know how much she would be paid if she ‘sold’ her story, (comment from the Mother). Yes, absolutely “best to let the trial go ahead” and perhaps lessons can be learned re the out-come.
Strange how so many worms emerging since the Jimmy S. accusations with many famous faces being hauled before the Courts on simliar charges (don’t get me started on the Catholic abuser’s), but not everyone was found guilty merely the few who hid behind their fame/money. But, then again why would ‘anyone’ be [that] afraid to emerge and relay the truth to the police without waiting for that prompt? could it possibly be the ‘victim’s afraid the police wouldn’t believe them?
The jury were selected to hear/view the truth – and that can be a harrowing experince (I served on same 12yrs past) for at the end of the trial the Defendant & Victim’s past is divuldged for all to hear. Ask yourself this: would Le Vell risk everything he worked for if guilty? and his Defense Lawyer 1 of the best in such case’s.
But then again, it could have taken the ‘victim’ this long to relay her story with faith in the police? I say good luck to Justice and I am not on here for arguments – merely trying to make sense out of nonsense. Alas, time will tell and true Justice served.
unless it’s his daughter….
Do some research and then some simple maths
Phil,I fear you may be correct.
why are people being arrested for suggesting this?
Phil, your comment will prob be removed..I’ve made several comments on other sites including this one in recent days saying that is who I think it is as nothing else makes sense but they have either been edited or removed. Which says it all. Sharon I think the ones arrested are ppl who have connections and are revealing who the victim is as opposed to guessing.
The accuser is same age as his daughter which might shed light on how he could have had access to a six year old at that time in the morning on a regular basis. Valid points re girl’s mother peepsluv – I can’t believe the she wouldn’t have known.
is it just one accusation against this guy.
Without a single shred of corroborative evidence, forensic or otherwise, it’s a case of her word against his. On that basis, the jury has no reasonable option but to acquit.
If he’s convicted, the floodgates will open to allow every nutter in England to bring allegations of abuse against anyone who annoys them.
The people convicted of abusing the nutters will then bring charges of abuse against the nutters, who will of course be convicted on the basis that an accusation equals guilt even where there’s no supporting evidence.
Very soon, everybody will be in prison.
Mr Le Vell must be acquitted if common sense and justice are to prevail.
Hi Rumpole,
Your logic is flawed.
2 days into the trial you are not in a position to comment. I’m not.
And ‘Rumpole of the Bailey’ would not have generalised in the way you have done
gojam you seem to think its ok to suggest someones guilty before there trails finished so whats wrong with someone suggesting innocence.
There are already many people that have been convicted on the basis of one word against another. In historic cases there often isn’t anything else.
I don’t think we’re at the floodgates stage but this is a gift to anyone with a vendetta against you and as the police are duty bound to investigate (and so they should)) people’s lives are put on hold for months. Police take annual leave, go on training courses and your case is put on hold for weeks at a time. The PR exercise by the CPS when they appeared to be oh so efficient announcing decisions regarding DLT and Jim Davidson made me laugh. In the real world they take months, because they are snowed under.
Gojam what I meant regarding the Rolf Harris wasn’t forgetting the more serious charges, but that if he did have a definite interest in child porn I would have thought there would have been a lot more images than 4.
Some accusers are liars though I wouldn’t want to comment on the girl in question, how do any of us know that are not party to the full facts of the case. If the “evidence” is not tested then anyone can walk into a police station make an allegation and it is fact. What many people have problems with is the idea that someone would lie about such a thing as it is such an extreme thing to do. But there are such people and their motives are many and varied, false accusers make the cause of real complainants all the more difficult.
The CPS is terrified that the public are too thick to make reasoned judgements on individual cases so they deliberately suppress the true numbers of false allegations by refusing to prosecute .http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CEAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cps.gov.uk%2Fnews%2Flatest_news%2Funder_the_spotlight%2F&ei=SjUmUoCULMLOhAfdpoDoBA&usg=AFQjCNHYsx3Mzr00rhq-lllcTYXJ3DsHSg&sig2=pnZSxMognEeZwzdHFCDqHQ
A very strange comment reddan.
Surely, by your own reasoning the very fact that this case has progessed beyond the CPS indicates something ?
Personally, I think the CPS is against the historic constitution of the UK. It is for a jury to decide guilt and the CPS appear to intrude on that decision.
Taking a good look at the Crown Prosecution Service and it’s overall effect would be a good idea.
The CPS and police investigations are not what you think Gojam. I read your blog religiously for six months between dec and may of this year and totally believed the police were at best reluctant to press for charges in sexual offences. That is not my view point now, at least not in cases regarding “little people” such as you and I. None of my defence witnesses have been interviewed by the police and yet my case has been passed onto the CPS how can that be a fair and even handed investigation procedure when they don’t have the full picture. If it gets to trial I am confident of a not guilty verdict ( at a cost of £50 k to myself )as I have a lot of evidence in my defence all which has been offered to the police but they have declined it. I thought maybe this was an unusual oversight but no, from the forum I have previously provided links to this appears to be standard practice.
I don’t know if I linked to the wrong article but the one I meant to include stated that although nearly 2000 false accuser cases had been looked at by the CPS, only 35 were prosecuted, not a very high conversion rate
The Rolf Harris case does concern me as it states there are only 4 images, I would lay a bet that ANYONE viewing legal adult porn would have this many images on their computer as there are so many pop ups integrated into the adult sites. This is not two dimensional in the way it is presented I have learnt that the hard way. However what I would say to any survivors out there holding back , don’t the police will listen to you and support you they will not fob you off as they have done in years gone by.
Please do not read my blog ‘religiously’
In fact I’ll put a fatwa on anyone who does !
The Rolf Harris charges are far more serious than ‘images’
I don’t know who you are but I do know of someone who was arrested for images but I doubt very much that they will be charged.
Images are rated 1 to 10 on the Copine scale – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COPINE_scale
Ratings 1 and 3, context and quantity must be a major consideration.
I dont rate his chances of going through a custodial sentence unscathed. Come on lags!
Perhaps you should wait and see if the man is convicted before salivating like this!
Pingback: Michael Le Vell: ‘Alleged Victim Is A Liar.’ | justiceforkevinandjenveybaylis
well what else would the defense if shes not a liar he has no defense.
if your not calling you accuser a lair theirs no point in pleading not guilty.