SLClyde Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Total non-story, he's played with us since after the civil conviction, the appeal during the week makes no difference now. Wonder if John Mason MSP will tweet up about how he's not going to games since he lost the appeal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLClyde Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 And to add, has also signed a 2 year deal since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Wonder if John Mason MSP will tweet up about how he's not going to games since he lost the appeal... Depends of course, on how much political capital he thinks he'll gain. Strange that he has been very quiet about the "indiscretions" of his fellow MSPs. Maybe he'll be boycotting his party conferences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Charlie Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 34 minutes ago, haufdaft said: Depends of course, on how much political capital he thinks he'll gain. Strange that he has been very quiet about the "indiscretions" of his fellow MSPs. Maybe he'll be boycotting his party conferences. Wonder if the papers know Mr Mason is still attending Clyde games ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 1 hour ago, Clydeontheup said: Wow, when did this happen? Wonder how much she got paid for the interview and more importantly who reads the Sunday post these days! Aye, who do these so called victims think they are, going to civil court because the criminal system failed them. Then, as if that's not bad enough, still bearing a grudge years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, Elementary Penguin said: What exactly is it that people are so afraid of, that they need funny little men dressed in wigs and 17th century clobber to feel warm, cuddly and safe that the outside world is in some shape of organised order? People pan the justice system for its many, many wrongdoings, and yet here we have a non-judicial verdict labelling untried citizens as rapists and a 'verdict' to wit the award of 200 bags of sand. If people are so keen to see the two banged up properly, so that society can feel that its done the right thing, then i do hope everyone clamouring for it is financially secure enough to be able to ward off similar accusations if this is the precedent. God help the real victims trying to find justice after this. The best way to avoid accusations and prosecution is not to rape in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 The best way to avoid accusations and prosecution is not to rape in the first place. Without reference to the Goodwillie case. What if you didn't rape but were accused anyway. Would you think you had justice if you were convicted based on balance of probability rather than beyond reasonable doubt? Historically, we have had too many wrong convictions from the latter, never mind the former. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, haufdaft said: Without reference to the Goodwillie case. What if you didn't rape but were accused anyway. Would you think you had justice if you were convicted based on balance of probability rather than beyond reasonable doubt? Historically, we have had too many wrong convictions from the latter, never mind the former. Are you saying civil cases shouldn't be allowed? They are very rare already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Are you saying civil cases shouldn't be allowed? They are very rare already. They should not be allowed to find someone criminally guilty as you seem to want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 6 minutes ago, haufdaft said: They should not be allowed to find someone criminally guilty as you seem to want. They haven't. They have found, on the balance of probabilites that the two were responsible and awarded damages. In the same way they would in any other civil case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 They haven't. They have found, on the balance of probabilites that the two were responsible and awarded damages. In the same way they would in any other civil case. I agree.However, look at the number of posts that say Goodwillie IS a rapist. That he has been found "GUILTY"Despite being innocent in the eyes of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawfield shed boy Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Didnt realise so many p&b posters were present in the night of the alleged incident.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 9 minutes ago, shawfield shed boy said: Didnt realise so many p&b posters were present in the night of the alleged incident.... We can abandon all courts then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Elementary Penguin said: The legal ones abandoned this case for a reason. It appears the narrative requires a baddie, and no matter the 'defenders'' response, they're het. It didn't get to criminal court. If it had, there would have been a more reliable outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 13 minutes ago, Elementary Penguin said: So you readily question its reliability when it suits to question the throwing out of the legal case? Had the PF taken the case, Goodwillie and Robertson would have had the chance to clear their names. They did give evidence in the civil case, but it was found to be unconvincing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawfield shed boy Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 We can abandon all courts then? So you were there/ know the full facts??! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, shawfield shed boy said: So you were there/ know the full facts??! A panel of Judges has heard the evidence and made a decision. Juries in criminal cases and judges in civil cases don't need to have been there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 3 minutes ago, Elementary Penguin said: Perhaps that was not taken up by the PF because, in the cold light of day, the 'Pursuer' both literally and figuratively had no idea what had occurred, let alone cite rape as the only possibility. You'll clearly see that at no point am i defending Goodwillie or his actions, nor and haven't done at any stage. Clyde's position in it, in truth is we signed a social paraih because we were fucking desperate. Those circumstances still bother me a lot more than the goings on in Bathgate pubs. The club would still function now even if he were sent down by the PF.....but I'm far more concerned with the legal road we're heading down if it becomes a landmark outcome than both. What route should the victims of the bin lorry incident take? Harry Clarke didn't get charged either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugster Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 22 minutes ago, shawfield shed boy said: So you were there/ know the full facts??! What a moron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrigtonClyde Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 4 hours ago, Sergeant Wilson said: They haven't. They have found, on the balance of probabilites that the two were responsible and awarded damages. In the same way they would in any other civil case. Which is exactly why civil courts are inappropriate for such cases I've read the summation in full and it's so full of contradictions it's sadly indicative of what's happening more broadly in our criminal and civil courts where hearings are not held before a jury For specific alleged offences involving specific groups of society, CPS guidelines have been issued which contradict law. They are of course an advisory body who should issue guidance in direct line with legislation passed by Acts of Parliament. Unfortunately, there have been and continue to be contraventions in the veracity of the advice they provide due to political pressure brought to bear on them, often triggered by pressure groups of various descriptions relating to different issues This is the literal meaning of corruption - a corruption of judicial process perpetuated by a small number empowered to do so, and executed where a jury is conveniently not present to consider a case using fundamental principles of law You mentioned Harry Clarke. Incredibly he was told he would face no charges prior to any investigation taking place and even subsequently when found to have given false statements about his health condition. At the time of that incident he was a public sector worker carrying out his duties. There are CPS guidelines in existence which afford public sector workers "special considerations" above private members of the public without any basis in law to do so. There is separate legislation for some members of the emergency services A number of pressure groups have lobbied politicians to set percentage targets of successful rape convictions. This is not a commercial enterprise, it's the legal system on which our democracy is based. Setting and accommodating percentage targets for successful convictions of any offence is extremely dangerous and highly likely to result in gross miscarriages of justice. If you find all this hard to believe, understandable, ask any criminal lawyer. He or she will acknowledge what I've written here, it's a scandal waiting to happen As for the specific case, I have no idea what happened that night. Rape is a horrific crime, but like any other offence, there has to be sufficient evidence to convict on the basis of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Otherwise all of us have a right to be assumed innocent and have our names cleared The severity of this allegation means that 'balance of probability' decided behind closed doors in the background of questionable CPS processes isn't appropriate The summation states that they found the pursuer to be a credible witness, one who gave evidence some considerable time after the alleged incident and who conceded she could not rebut anything to which the two alleged of committing a crime testified In a much broader sense folks, be careful what you wish for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.