Quote:
Originally Posted by wadey
In her final comments prosecutor Kerry Malin claimed Mr Bacon "took advantage of a drunk woman in bed with her clothes on".
She said: "He turned up and could see a woman in drink and it was too good an opportunity to miss."
Judith Khan, defending, said that there was no evidence that the woman had or had not given consent and drunken consent was still consent.
She addressed the jury, saying: "How on earth can you be sure of guilt on the account of someone who cannot help one way or the other?"
Mr Bacon was cleared by the jury of four men and seven women after they deliberated for 45 minutes. "
So we've forked out tens of thousands of pounds to solicitors and barristers and we knew he would be found "Not Guilty" and it only took the jury a few minutes for them all to decide. How many more of these pointless cases are waiting? Why hasn't somebody at the CPS got the xxxxx to say "This isn't going anywhere"
|
It only took 10 minutes really the other 35 they were having a brew to make it look better. I can't, for the life in me, understand why the CPS allowed this case anyway near a court room, how could there be even the smallest chance of a conviction when the accuser didn't know what date it was, never mind that she was forced to have sex. The fact that she woke up with this guy still in bed next to her spoke volumes, if he had raped her he'd have been away long before she came round from her drunken stupor. The only losers in all this is are the tax payer and the poor sod who's had is name dragged through the mud for no good reason, just to placate the conscience of some drunk woman who can't control her obviously out of control drinking problem. The sooner the law is change, to withhold the name of a suspect until he's found guilty, the better, after all its still the law of the land that your innocent until proved guilty, but not for men in rape cases, it stinks and does nothing to help genuine rape victims