Independent Leyton Orient Forum

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 9:39 am

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 9:28 am

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 9:19 am She spoke her truth by posting a recording of the attack online. Havent heard anything since.

After half destroying her partners career shouldn't she release the full video/new material that exonerates him if all is forgiven and it wasn't a rape after all?

You haven’t but the police have.

Why should she? They’ve both moved on and have had a baby, maybe its about time you moved on too.

What do you think this new material that exonerates him is?

Why should she? After half destroying her partners career shouldn't she release the full video/new material that exonerates him if all is forgiven and it wasn't a rape after all?

CNC ?

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/a ... n-consent/

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 2:31 pm

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 1:55 pm

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 1:48 pm

Everybody agrees that what was said on that video clip was unsavoury but the case against him still collapsed .
Edit , As for the LBC comment I always listen to my pocket radio every morning while walking the dog . That's when I get to hear these debates .

UNSAVOURY

Ah, I hadn't seen that before . That's diabolical . Well he won't be playing for Man Utd again , that's for sure . Anyway , what has the police done about it .

Did Sylvester Stallone really get beaten up in
Rocky 1 2 &3 ?

Max Fowler wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 2:17 pm

Beradogs wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 2:07 pm This has a whiff of racism from certain board members. I myself don’t see colour, we are all one skin.

Relentless.

And pointless. Bera's schtick went out of fashion circa 2017.

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 1:55 pm

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 1:48 pm

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 1:41 pm LBC again..

Watch the video/recordings

Everybody agrees that what was said on that video clip was unsavoury but the case against him still collapsed .
Edit , As for the LBC comment I always listen to my pocket radio every morning while walking the dog . That's when I get to hear these debates .

UNSAVOURY

Yeah, but besides the pictures and audio recording, what evidence have you got?

Monkey Boy wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 2:25 pm Don’t know much about the case but maybe your all missing the point. These young kids that play pro football especially in the premiership have to much time and far to much money on there hands. Very few have higher education (always the exception) most come straight out of school and go into scholarships with the clubs. Instead of giving them so much media training shouldn’t they(the clubs) be giving them life and social skills training and perhaps even putting a percentage of there earnings as investments away for them. Think the parents should be accountable in some respects to.

These young lads are earning ridiculous amounts of money from a ridiculously early age, have people fawning all over them and as you say, are quite often short on education. It's surprising when they don't turn out like fannies.

The likes of Bellingham are the exception.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66574759

Chopping up journos
Domestic violence

Admin wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 9:23 am

Neptune's Spear wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 8:35 am "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone"

I'm sure that you guys are hardly innocent little choir boys ?

Well 100% certain I've never attempted to rape anyone.

I'm also 101% certain you're a f*cking idiot.

You personify everything that's wrong with this message board. You're a lout, a bully, thteatening, ignorant, bigoted
abusive, self righteous and a coward.

Some truely bizarre comments on this thread.

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 1:34 pm Listening to LBC this morning the alleged victim withdrew the allegations and the case against Mason collapsed so you have to say he's innocent .Apparently at this moment in time he won't be leaving Man Utd but going out on loan . Fiorentina are supposed to be interested so if I was him I'd go abroad and rebuild my career .

“… you have to say he’s innocent.”

What part of the judicial system don’t you understand, or is it ALL of it?

The police can still seek a conviction even if the alleged victim withdraws.

Dearie me. It’s a good idea, always, to consider (and preempt) the best argument against what you’re asserting. Are you aware of what the counter argument to this post might be? Are you intelligent and honest enough to be able to say “of course, the counter argument is X”, and then say why it’s wrong? I’ll give you a chance to do so before I tell you why that post is demonstrably ignorant and reinforces regressive ideas about domestic violence. Over to you!

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:08 am The police can still seek a conviction even if the alleged victim withdraws.

Fair to say the police f*cked it in this case. You have a potential victim of abuse and a controlling relationship who is persistently contacted by the accused, in breach of their bail terms. The potential victim has subsequently gotten back together with that person having dropped their cooperation with the investigation.

From everything we know about abusive relationships, this is the exact sort of situation that the bail conditions were there to avoid, but there was zero consequences to Greenwood for doing this.

Neptune's Spear wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 8:07 pm

Admin wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 9:23 am

Neptune's Spear wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 8:35 am "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone"

I'm sure that you guys are hardly innocent little choir boys ?

Well 100% certain I've never attempted to rape anyone.

I'm also 101% certain you're a f*cking idiot.

You personify everything that's wrong with this message board. You're a lout, a bully, thteatening, ignorant, bigoted
abusive, self righteous and a coward.

Thanks for focusing on my good points.

Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:30 am

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:08 am The police can still seek a conviction even if the alleged victim withdraws.

Fair to say the police f*cked it in this case. You have a potential victim of abuse and a controlling relationship who is persistently contacted by the accused, in breach of their bail terms. The potential victim has subsequently gotten back together with that person having dropped their cooperation with the investigation.

From everything we know about abusive relationships, this is the exact sort of situation that the bail conditions were there to avoid, but there was zero consequences to Greenwood for doing this.

I am not sure that it is fair to blame the police.

I accept the rest of your first paragraph may well be what actually happened.

However, what do you expect the police to do? They need evidence to enable a successful prosecution. If the complainant is not prepared to give evidence, then it leaves the police with no evidence to present to the CPS and ultimately to the court.

If the complainant is not prepared to give evidence that Greenwood breached his bail conditions, then how do they prove a breach of bail? There are insufficient resources to have a 24/7 watch on every complainant and suspect of abuse cases to make sure there is no contact. Even then it is difficult to prevent indirect contact.

The bail conditions were imposed by the court not the police

People seem to forget that there needs to be admissible evidence to proceed with a prosecution. Where there is not sufficient admissible evidence there cannot be a successful prosecution.

Also, it was the CPS who chose to discontinue the case, not the police. Post charge, the CPS not the police make the decisions

Blaming the police is an easy knee jerk reaction, and even easier when you cannot say what the police should have done differently

Neptune's Spear wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 8:07 pm

Admin wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 9:23 am

Neptune's Spear wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2023 8:35 am "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone"

I'm sure that you guys are hardly innocent little choir boys ?

Well 100% certain I've never attempted to rape anyone.

I'm also 101% certain you're a f*cking idiot.

You personify everything that's wrong with this message board. You're a lout, a bully, thteatening, ignorant, bigoted
abusive, self righteous and a coward.

You missed out that time when the money was found "resting" in his account.

I guess I am baffled by a situation where the CPS/police think there's sufficient evidence here to seek a prosecution of crimes typically of an abusive relationship and know the potential victim is highly vulnerable to manipulation and coercion by the accused, because that is the case in every abusive relationship ever. And yet when the accused is able to re-establish contact (to the point where he's buying the alleged victim gifts), there are zero consequences. It seems obvious that a risk from that was that Greenwood would be able to say 'i swear I can change' and it was believed.

From a previous job in social housing, it was really hammered into us that trying to extricate a potential victim from contact from a potentially abusive partner was essential as it is very common for victims to end up back with the abuser. It's not a simple case of 'the heart wants what the heart wants' or ignoring the woman's agency, people in abusive relationships regularly find it difficult to see signs of abuse that are obvious to others.

Going by his statement, Greenwood thinks he's actually been vindicated by this entire sh*t show (he's said he's been cleared of the charges which is factually incorrect), which makes it harder to buy any narrative of remorse or learning. All for second chances provided there is some form of atonement - I don't see any in this case.

It's nice that all these guys are rushing to the defence of this alleged rapist, I guess.

So why isnt her recording enough evidence? Any reason it would be inadmissible?

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:38 am

Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:30 am

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:08 am The police can still seek a conviction even if the alleged victim withdraws.

Fair to say the police f*cked it in this case. You have a potential victim of abuse and a controlling relationship who is persistently contacted by the accused, in breach of their bail terms. The potential victim has subsequently gotten back together with that person having dropped their cooperation with the investigation.

From everything we know about abusive relationships, this is the exact sort of situation that the bail conditions were there to avoid, but there was zero consequences to Greenwood for doing this.

However, what do you expect the police to do? They need evidence to enable a successful prosecution. If the complainant is not prepared to give evidence, then it leaves the police with no evidence to present to the CPS and ultimately to the court.

That's not entirely true though. As already pointed out, the police are able to pursue prosecutions without a victim's cooperation in certain circumstances but particularly in DV cases, precisely to try and mitigate common consequences of the abuser/victim dynamic.

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 10:02 am

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:38 am

Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:30 am

Fair to say the police f*cked it in this case. You have a potential victim of abuse and a controlling relationship who is persistently contacted by the accused, in breach of their bail terms. The potential victim has subsequently gotten back together with that person having dropped their cooperation with the investigation.

From everything we know about abusive relationships, this is the exact sort of situation that the bail conditions were there to avoid, but there was zero consequences to Greenwood for doing this.

However, what do you expect the police to do? They need evidence to enable a successful prosecution. If the complainant is not prepared to give evidence, then it leaves the police with no evidence to present to the CPS and ultimately to the court.

That's not entirely true though. As already pointed out, the police are able to pursue prosecutions without a victim's cooperation in certain circumstances but particularly in DV cases, precisely to try and mitigate common consequences of the abuser/victim dynamic.

a) The CPS pursue prosecutions, not the police.
b) The CPS chose to discontinue the case, not the police. It was post charge. The police do not have the power to discontinue a case post charge
c) There has to be admissible evidence to obtain a conviction. In this case without the complainant tro give evidence there is no realistic prospect of conviction
d) The complainant did not want the prosecution brought. If, in the absence of evidence of duress etc, you try to force a prosecution, it will have the long term effect of stopping alleged victims coming forward to seek help


Its all very well in keyboard land to make glib statements, but you need to go back to basic legal principles - ie little minor things like needing admissible evidence and the prosecution having to discharge the burden of proof.

In this case, there is nothing to suggest the police did not do everything correctly and legally.

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:59 am So why isnt her recording enough evidence? Any reason it would be inadmissible?

Yes, there is no evidence of the legitimacy of the recording , who recorded it when it was recorded, no evidence its not a faked recording. No evidence they were not for example role playing.

You need the person who made the recording to give evidence to confirm these things.

We come back to the basic principle that you need admissible evidence of the offence to be able to discharge the burden of proof on the prosecution

Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:30 am

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:08 am The police can still seek a conviction even if the alleged victim withdraws.

Fair to say the police f*cked it in this case. You have a potential victim of abuse and a controlling relationship who is persistently contacted by the accused, in breach of their bail terms. The potential victim has subsequently gotten back together with that person having dropped their cooperation with the investigation.

From everything we know about abusive relationships, this is the exact sort of situation that the bail conditions were there to avoid, but there was zero consequences to Greenwood for doing this.

There should be an investigation into the handling of it and a full explanation as to why they dropped it. Especially as its so public.

Not sure how it could have played out in court either, seeing as he’s a public figure and there was so much discourse on social media. Almost impossible to have a non-biased jury.

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:18 am Dearie me. It’s a good idea, always, to consider (and preempt) the best argument against what you’re asserting. Are you aware of what the counter argument to this post might be? Are you intelligent and honest enough to be able to say “of course, the counter argument is X”, and then say why it’s wrong? I’ll give you a chance to do so before I tell you why that post is demonstrably ignorant and reinforces regressive ideas about domestic violence. Over to you!

If you take the public evidence on face value, they could have got a conviction for something.

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 10:18 am

Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:30 am

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:08 am The police can still seek a conviction even if the alleged victim withdraws.

Fair to say the police f*cked it in this case. You have a potential victim of abuse and a controlling relationship who is persistently contacted by the accused, in breach of their bail terms. The potential victim has subsequently gotten back together with that person having dropped their cooperation with the investigation.

From everything we know about abusive relationships, this is the exact sort of situation that the bail conditions were there to avoid, but there was zero consequences to Greenwood for doing this.

There should be an investigation into the handling of it and a full explanation as to why they dropped it. Especially as its so public.

There is no need for an investigation, unless you want to pay for one personally - it is clear why the case was discontinued. There was insufficient admissible evidence to justify the prospect of a conviction

The fact it is so public as you put it is irrelevant.

You need admissible evidence to prosecute a case

Not sure how it could have played out in court either, seeing as he’s a public figure and there was so much discourse on social media. Almost impossible to have a non-biased jury.

BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 10:20 am

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:18 am Dearie me. It’s a good idea, always, to consider (and preempt) the best argument against what you’re asserting. Are you aware of what the counter argument to this post might be? Are you intelligent and honest enough to be able to say “of course, the counter argument is X”, and then say why it’s wrong? I’ll give you a chance to do so before I tell you why that post is demonstrably ignorant and reinforces regressive ideas about domestic violence. Over to you!

If you take the public evidence on face value, they could have got a conviction for something.

You need ADMISSIBLE evidence.

There was and is insufficient ADMISSIBLE evidence to justify the prospect of a conviction