Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
- fretmeister
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:13 am
- About me: Magician, Entertainer, Balloon Modeller, Skeptic, Singer, Bassist, Guitarist, all round audience addict! (I'm also a lawyer but don't tell anyone)
- Location: sneaking up behind you with my hairy sack of magic
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
I can't be arsed to read it all but...
i) I want to know what the brief from the Crown Prosecution Service said. At the moment they have deflected every question about that. It is entirely possible for the barrister to have been instructed to use that terminology, or simply instructed to attack the nature of the complainant in a strong manner.
ii) The barrister in question is very experienced and very well respected.
iii) One unwise comment in 20 years of solid practice does not make him incompetent and certainly does not make vilification by the media an appropriate response.
iv) There is definitely, absolutely more to this story than has been reported.
v) While in the vast majority of cases (perhaps even 99.9%) it might be inappropriate to describe a child as a predator the existence of Mary Bell, Jon Venables, Robert Thompson, Eric Smith etc etc etc means that the description is proper in a small amount of cases and until the full facts of the matter are disclosed none of us can even guess as to whether this case falls into that small bracket.
vi) The oddest part of the entire thing - this barrister was appearing for the prosecution, not the defence. Showing the complainant in an innocent light is part of a Prosecutor's job to increase the seriousness of the charge against the Defendant. The prosecutor weakened his own case for no good reason I can think of.
There is loads about this case that has not been disclosed, and there are too many possible variables to even make a wild guess.
i) I want to know what the brief from the Crown Prosecution Service said. At the moment they have deflected every question about that. It is entirely possible for the barrister to have been instructed to use that terminology, or simply instructed to attack the nature of the complainant in a strong manner.
ii) The barrister in question is very experienced and very well respected.
iii) One unwise comment in 20 years of solid practice does not make him incompetent and certainly does not make vilification by the media an appropriate response.
iv) There is definitely, absolutely more to this story than has been reported.
v) While in the vast majority of cases (perhaps even 99.9%) it might be inappropriate to describe a child as a predator the existence of Mary Bell, Jon Venables, Robert Thompson, Eric Smith etc etc etc means that the description is proper in a small amount of cases and until the full facts of the matter are disclosed none of us can even guess as to whether this case falls into that small bracket.
vi) The oddest part of the entire thing - this barrister was appearing for the prosecution, not the defence. Showing the complainant in an innocent light is part of a Prosecutor's job to increase the seriousness of the charge against the Defendant. The prosecutor weakened his own case for no good reason I can think of.
There is loads about this case that has not been disclosed, and there are too many possible variables to even make a wild guess.
MusicRadar is dead. Long Live http://thefretboard.co.uk/
- colubridae
- Custom Rank: Rank
- Posts: 2771
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:16 pm
- About me: http://www.essentialart.com/acatalog/Ed ... Stars.html
- Location: Birmingham art gallery
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
mistermack wrote:It's lazy to paint everybody who might disagree with you as trolls.
I would only identify three on this forum as habitually trolling. But there are loads who I disagree with.
I might think that their opinions are wrong, or even objectionable. And they me I expect.
That doesn't make them or me trolls.

A few rational posters tried to comment concerning the multi-faceted nature of the OP.
Highly rational comment proceeded for a short time only. Pretty soon the mud-slinging started from only those espousing the PC point of view.
To the extent that zilla called seth a paedophile. With no due cause whatsoever. Quite reasonably seth reacted. Seth gets swiftly cautioned. Zilla nothing yet.
Is it now the case that rational discussion will no longer be accepted?
I’ve no reason to love Mistermack, we’ve crossed swords many times, but he is right on the button with here.
This is a very serious subject and warrants deep discussion, not scurrilous accusations.
Sorry RUM if you want 100% agreement with what you post, then you should say so.
Our town suffered badly when two 13-year-olds accused a head-teacher of abuse. He was subsequently cleared and the two girls recanted their accusation. Too late the head was forced to resign. The frenzy of “12-year-olds are only children and aren’t able to cause problems” is exactly the climate that led to his ‘resignation’.
I have a well balanced personality. I've got chips on both shoulders
- Svartalf
- Offensive Grail Keeper
- Posts: 41185
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
- Location: Paris France
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
Thanks Fret... now, if you got links to explain and expand on what you said, I'd be grateful, this sounds exceedingly strange.
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
Fretmeister, All agreed.
As far as the last bit goes, I did have an understanding that the prosecutor's job is not to necessarily portray the defendant in the worst possible light, but to put the true facts before the court to the best of his/her ability.
So if the evidence was that the girl was of a predatory nature, he had a duty to bring that information to the court.
I find it odd that there have been no quotes from the defendant's advocate. It makes me wonder if he was represented at all.
As far as the last bit goes, I did have an understanding that the prosecutor's job is not to necessarily portray the defendant in the worst possible light, but to put the true facts before the court to the best of his/her ability.
So if the evidence was that the girl was of a predatory nature, he had a duty to bring that information to the court.
I find it odd that there have been no quotes from the defendant's advocate. It makes me wonder if he was represented at all.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
- fretmeister
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:13 am
- About me: Magician, Entertainer, Balloon Modeller, Skeptic, Singer, Bassist, Guitarist, all round audience addict! (I'm also a lawyer but don't tell anyone)
- Location: sneaking up behind you with my hairy sack of magic
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
'Predatory' behaviour doesn't have a definition (that I can find anyway) so it is effectively a subjective opinion. Advocates are not supposed to present their *own* opinion on facts (as opposed to interpretation of law), they are supposed to present facts as they exist (actually, if you want to get really picky they merely present the questions that allow the witnesses to present the facts). There is a duty of disclosure of all *evidence* that the prosecution will rely on, but I haven't seen any media mention of evidence of predatory behaviour or who has decided that particular behaviour is predatory rather than being unwise / stupid / mis-informed etc.mistermack wrote:Fretmeister, All agreed.
As far as the last bit goes, I did have an understanding that the prosecutor's job is not to necessarily portray the defendant in the worst possible light, but to put the true facts before the court to the best of his/her ability.
So if the evidence was that the girl was of a predatory nature, he had a duty to bring that information to the court.
I find it odd that there have been no quotes from the defendant's advocate. It makes me wonder if he was represented at all.
So with that in mind and recognising the prosecutor's client is The People / State / The Crown the complainant is a 'friendly' to his client. Effectively he damaged the evidential value of a witness who is there to support his case. That is what confuses me the most. I've been in litigation for about 17 years now and I can't figure that out at all.
The defendant would definitely have been represented. Legal Aid is almost always available to pay for a specialist barrister in cases where imprisonment is a possible sentence. (Although with the Legal Aid changes that are planned anyone earning more than £35K a year won't get it. Even for a murder case that will cost £500K to defend. But that's a rant for another day)
I've been bombarding the CPS twitter with requests for details of the Brief to the barrister. No answers yet!
MusicRadar is dead. Long Live http://thefretboard.co.uk/
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
Fretmeister, I was just going on an interview on the BBC discussing this case.
The ''expert'' was a very senior lady lawyer of some sort, but I forget who she was, and it was her who said that about the prosecutor having a duty to present all facts to the court.
I wish I could remember who she was, but she certainly seemed to know her stuff, and was saying roughly what you posted, about there being far more to the case.
I would personally far prefer the opinions of the judge and prosecutor, to the DPP.
They have worked though the case from beginning to end, hearing all sides.
The DPP probably has a single page summary in front of him, and a note from David Cameron, leaning on him.
Neither Carmeron or the DPP are in a fit place to criticise the Judge, or the barrister.
Cameron just wants to get some cheap votes, through appearing sympathetic to victims,
and the DPP just wants to please Cameron.
It's out of order.
The ''expert'' was a very senior lady lawyer of some sort, but I forget who she was, and it was her who said that about the prosecutor having a duty to present all facts to the court.
I wish I could remember who she was, but she certainly seemed to know her stuff, and was saying roughly what you posted, about there being far more to the case.
I would personally far prefer the opinions of the judge and prosecutor, to the DPP.
They have worked though the case from beginning to end, hearing all sides.
The DPP probably has a single page summary in front of him, and a note from David Cameron, leaning on him.
Neither Carmeron or the DPP are in a fit place to criticise the Judge, or the barrister.
Cameron just wants to get some cheap votes, through appearing sympathetic to victims,
and the DPP just wants to please Cameron.
It's out of order.
Last edited by mistermack on Thu Aug 08, 2013 2:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
- Audley Strange
- "I blame the victim"
- Posts: 7485
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
I, once, on the way to work was stopped by two eleven year old boys who told me that if I didn't buy them a bottle of cider they would tell the police I'd touched their pricks. Children are not innocent little angels, however it does not matter if the child in question was a 13 year old prostitute. If the accused is mentally incapable of function as an adult then there may have been a case that he was exploited, but it seems to be that he wasn't and as such, if he is capable of understanding the law, he knew he was breaking it. He also had child porn on his comp, I don't think we are talking about some naive virginal old man being duped by some jailbait.
From the article which is somewhat in discussion.
Our cultures set what is and is not legally permissible sexually. Currently our culture thinks 16 is a fair age of consent, other cultures practices are irrelevant to the topic.
From the article which is somewhat in discussion.
So it was clear the guy was just a bit overenthusiastic with his rhetoric which was deemed inappropriate behaviour by the CPS, his employers, who suspended him.BBC legal correspondent Clive Coleman said a prosecutor must draw to a court's attention any matter that assists the defendant - and it is not at all unusual.
But, our correspondent added, the prosecutor needed to scrutinise the potentially mitigating material carefully and the language in which it is expressed.
Our cultures set what is and is not legally permissible sexually. Currently our culture thinks 16 is a fair age of consent, other cultures practices are irrelevant to the topic.
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man
- fretmeister
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:13 am
- About me: Magician, Entertainer, Balloon Modeller, Skeptic, Singer, Bassist, Guitarist, all round audience addict! (I'm also a lawyer but don't tell anyone)
- Location: sneaking up behind you with my hairy sack of magic
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
Assisting the defendant is not the same as damaging your own case though.
He could have described the complainants actions as a series of actions - presenting the facts. Providing an emotionally heavy opinion as to how to interpret those actions goes beyond helping the defendant.
I wonder if the defence barrister had already used the term. I would expect a defence barrister to seriously attack the character of any prosecution witnesses.
GAH! I want a full transcript!!!
IT MAKES NO SENSE!!!
He could have described the complainants actions as a series of actions - presenting the facts. Providing an emotionally heavy opinion as to how to interpret those actions goes beyond helping the defendant.
I wonder if the defence barrister had already used the term. I would expect a defence barrister to seriously attack the character of any prosecution witnesses.
GAH! I want a full transcript!!!
IT MAKES NO SENSE!!!
MusicRadar is dead. Long Live http://thefretboard.co.uk/
- fretmeister
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:13 am
- About me: Magician, Entertainer, Balloon Modeller, Skeptic, Singer, Bassist, Guitarist, all round audience addict! (I'm also a lawyer but don't tell anyone)
- Location: sneaking up behind you with my hairy sack of magic
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
mistermack wrote:Fretmeister, I was just going on an interview on the BBC discussing this case.
The ''expert'' was a very senior lady lawyer of some sort, but I forget who she was, and it was her who said that about the prosecutor having a duty to present all facts to the court.
I wish I could remember who she was, but she certainly seemed to know her stuff, and was saying roughly what you posted, about there being far more to the case.
I would personally far prefer the opinions of the judge and prosecutor, to the DPP.
They have worked though the case from beginning to end, hearing all sides.
The DPP probably has a single page summary in front of him, and a note from David Cameron, leaning on him.
Neither Carmeron or the DPP are in a fit place to criticise the Judge, or the barrister.
Cameron just wants to get some cheap votes, through appearing sympathetic to victims,
and the DPP just wants to please Cameron.
It's out of order.
Was the senior lawyer Barbara Hewson?
She is known for making comments about cases she is not involved in. She recently called the Savile child rape / abuse Investigation 'a witch hunt against old men'
MusicRadar is dead. Long Live http://thefretboard.co.uk/
- Audley Strange
- "I blame the victim"
- Posts: 7485
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
She's a moron then. That would at least be a Wizard Hunt.


"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
No, she was nothing like that. She was a lot older, and came across as a senior figure, like the head of the bar association or that kind of ilk.fretmeister wrote: Was the senior lawyer Barbara Hewson?
She is known for making comments about cases she is not involved in. She recently called the Savile child rape / abuse Investigation 'a witch hunt against old men'
She certainly wasn't a campaigner, or someone with an axe to grind. She was more there to represent the legal profession.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
- Warren Dew
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 pm
- Location: Somerville, MA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
It may be relevant that the comment seems to have been made during the sentencing phase, which is not technically adversarial.fretmeister wrote:v) While in the vast majority of cases (perhaps even 99.9%) it might be inappropriate to describe a child as a predator the existence of Mary Bell, Jon Venables, Robert Thompson, Eric Smith etc etc etc means that the description is proper in a small amount of cases and until the full facts of the matter are disclosed none of us can even guess as to whether this case falls into that small bracket.
- Warren Dew
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 pm
- Location: Somerville, MA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
This is a problem for adult victims of rape, too. It has little or nothing to do with age.Rum wrote:The OP concerned the way courts handle such cases. Young, vulnerable people who appear in court to give evidence have traditionally been treated as if they were not that - i.e. young and/or vulnerable. In one of the worst cases I have read about one of the Oxford group of girls, having been groomed and sold to multiple rapists for sex was cross examined by eight defence barristers (lawyers) on behalf of their clients. In that case the man who was responsible for grooming the girl got 25 years. The girl, speaking afterwards, said that if faced with the situation again she would not give evidence. She was left feeling like she was the guilty one having been 'dismantled' as it was described.
- Rum
- Absent Minded Processor
- Posts: 37285
- Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
- Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
I agree, though arguably children are more vulnerable that adults.
There were two concurrent stories running in the press yesterday by coincidence. One concerned the girl in the molestation case being called 'predatory' and the other was about steps being taken to reduce the 'abusive' experience some vulnerable people have when giving evidence in court. They have been conflated to some extent here, but they are only related by subject, and are not connected in terms of process.
There were two concurrent stories running in the press yesterday by coincidence. One concerned the girl in the molestation case being called 'predatory' and the other was about steps being taken to reduce the 'abusive' experience some vulnerable people have when giving evidence in court. They have been conflated to some extent here, but they are only related by subject, and are not connected in terms of process.
- fretmeister
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:13 am
- About me: Magician, Entertainer, Balloon Modeller, Skeptic, Singer, Bassist, Guitarist, all round audience addict! (I'm also a lawyer but don't tell anyone)
- Location: sneaking up behind you with my hairy sack of magic
- Contact:
Re: Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!
There is still no reason for the prosecutor to say it though. The complainant is on 'his side'Warren Dew wrote:It may be relevant that the comment seems to have been made during the sentencing phase, which is not technically adversarial.fretmeister wrote:v) While in the vast majority of cases (perhaps even 99.9%) it might be inappropriate to describe a child as a predator the existence of Mary Bell, Jon Venables, Robert Thompson, Eric Smith etc etc etc means that the description is proper in a small amount of cases and until the full facts of the matter are disclosed none of us can even guess as to whether this case falls into that small bracket.
I really hope this doesn't turn out to be a massive mis-reporting of a closing speech sentence like
"if, as the defendant has attempted to portray, the victim is predatory then that...."
Wouldn't be the first time some idiot hack has got the wrong end of the stick.
MusicRadar is dead. Long Live http://thefretboard.co.uk/
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 29 guests