Saudi millionaire cleared of rape after claiming he fell and accidentally penetrated teenager

The jury acquitted after just 30 minutes.

Most evidence was given in private.

The news organisations do not know the full facts.

I see justice.

It's depressing that this still can happen in 2015. I hope somebody will fall by accident on him with acid.

As much that this does sound outrageous and suspicious I would never wish harm on an individual  by pouring acid on someone.. that is equally outrageous and the justice of the gutter. The appropriate action would be a custodial sentence where the individual can rehabilitated... albeit in that part of the world I suspect that is very unlikely even if convicted.. and that is equally outrageous.

Simon

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

... albeit in that part of the world I suspect that is very unlikely even if convicted.. and that is equally outrageous.

Mike-B posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

... albeit in that part of the world I suspect that is very unlikely even if convicted.. and that is equally outrageous.

...........    err Simon ???    "that part of the world"   is Southwark Crown Court

The offence took place in Maida Vale

Yes.  Places where Statements and 555s sees themselves perfectly at home ! 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

As much that this does sound outrageous and suspicious I would never wish harm on an individual  by pouring acid on someone.. that is equally outrageous and the justice of the gutter. The appropriate action would be a custodial sentence where the individual can rehabilitated... albeit in that part of the world I suspect that is very unlikely even if convicted.. and that is equally outrageous.

Simon

..of course I agree with you, just always get angry about these kind of injustices when they happen...

Bert Schurink posted:

It's depressing that this still can happen in 2015. I hope somebody will fall by accident on him with acid.

Depressing that what can happen?

That a young girl can accuse a man of rape?

That it goes to trial?

That he is found not guilty by a jury of his peers?

The only depressing thing that I see is that anyone would see acid as a punishment for anything.

Gents -

I read that the key testimony was delivered only in private. Also, I find it hard to believe that a jury could reach a not guilty verdict in such a short time without some good reason. 

I am not a fan of caddish behavior, but I am also not a prude.  I just think that in this case, some may be rushing to judgement based only on a tabloid synopsis.

Hook

Mike-B posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

... albeit in that part of the world I suspect that is very unlikely even if convicted.. and that is equally outrageous.

...........    err Simon ???    "that part of the world"   is Southwark Crown Court

The offence took place in Maida Vale

Thanks Mike -  

engjoo posted:

Has anyone been amused by this news lately ?

It has generated rather lots of discussion on the British legal system from this side of the world! 

Can't help but to think of how can this be possible!

Can someone provide any links to this news story?  This is something I've not seen.

Sorry have found it... http://www.independent.co.uk/n...f-rape-a6774946.html

Sounds like a case which has more to it (and the activities of the night) than the brief facts mentioned.

One side says "forced" the other side suggested more there was some playing around when both were (consensually) semi-clothed and things happened the woman later regretted.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

As much that this does sound outrageous and suspicious I would never wish harm on an individual  by pouring acid on someone.. that is equally outrageous and the justice of the gutter. The appropriate action would be a custodial sentence where the individual can rehabilitated... albeit in that part of the world I suspect that is very unlikely even if convicted.. and that is equally outrageous.

Simon

Outrageous overuse of the word 'outrageous'! It reminds me of the Not The Nine O'Clock News sketch where Union officials had to avoid using the word 'aspirations'.

Totally outrageous 

Bananahead posted:

Bert Schurink posted:

It's depressing that this still can happen in 2015. I hope somebody will fall by accident on him with acid.

Depressing that what can happen?

That a young girl can accuse a man of rape?

That it goes to trial?

That he is found not guilty by a jury of his peers?

 

The only depressing thing that I see is that anyone would see acid as a punishment for anything.

Completely agree. There is clearly more to this than what we have been fed by the tabloids. No judgement by we uninformed masses is valid, nor worthwhile.

Hook posted:

I just think that in this case, some may be rushing to judgement based only on a tabloid synopsis.

The press would never let anything so inconsequential as the facts of the case get in the way of a dramatic synopsis. I don't know why people still read and recycle this shit. I suppose they must want to be fed it.

It is in the press here in Singapore. Mind you, not tabloids but mainstream media! 

Since this is a UK forum, here it goes:

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...f-rape-a6774946.html

totemphile posted:

Bananahead posted:

Bert Schurink posted:

It's depressing that this still can happen in 2015. I hope somebody will fall by accident on him with acid.

Depressing that what can happen?

That a young girl can accuse a man of rape?

That it goes to trial?

That he is found not guilty by a jury of his peers?

 

You got to be kidding man. Is there a brain inside that head of yours or just bananas?

  

I don't understand this reply. Please explain.

Ah, it's good to be Trump. He's still at it with that old "fell on the chick 100 times or so" story, eh? Good for him. Stick with what's working. At least he stopped using his "Ebay said she was 18 when I put her in the cart" defense. 

engjoo posted:

It is in the press here in Singapore. Mind you, not tabloids but mainstream media! 

Since this is a UK forum, here it goes:

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...f-rape-a6774946.html

 

That's article I read. It still gives very little to go on. What is the relevance of stating his nationality or financial status? It's still just populist clickbait, playing to our prejudices and fears, and our love of a good corruption/conspiracy theory. I respectfully suggest that forum commentators are not in a position to better judge guilt than that jury was.

It's amazing how quickly someone can still raise a lynch mob based on nothing more than dramatic speculation. Sure hope it doesn't march round a corner near me any time soon.

Harry posted:

It's amazing how quickly someone can still raise a lynch mob

What lynch mob?

winkyincanada posted:

 What is the relevance of stating his nationality or financial status?

I don't know about Canada, but here in Blighty, (except in special circumstances) defendents' nationality, age, occupation, etc is revealed at trials. As part of the democratic process, journalists are permitted to report on trials in Crown Courts and proceedings at magistrates' courts. It is not as if the hacks were digging up anything that wasn't on the record. What is the problem here?

Harry posted:

The press would never let anything so inconsequential as the facts of the case get in the way of a dramatic synopsis. I don't know why people still read and recycle this shit. I suppose they must want to be fed it.

What a load of garbage! Why don't you get off your high horse? The air is so rarified up there it's obviously affecting your judgement and making you sound like some overly-moralistic prig. Which I am sure you are not.

A case went to trial by jury, and the defendant as found not guilty. The media reported it. What is your problem?

You may or may not care to skim over the volume of feedback posted world wide about the case. If so you will have little option but to conclude that a significant proportion of people who have not heard the evidence are willing to believe that he should be strung up. Or burned with acid, as one contributor in this thread has suggested.  It's like when a Sunday paper outed those pedophiles and some ordinary bloke got beaten up by a mob. Seems we don't learn.

There are plenty of people in pivotal positions in society who could be outed for the self serving liars they are.  And all sorts of stuff going on in the world which we never hear about, some of which affects us. Is this story actually news? Accused rapist acquitted.

Mind you, that plucky British spaceman who got launched this week generated a lot of what the media chose to now call news.  A description of what the rocket looked like and the colour of the sky. An interview with his wife. An interview with his mum. An interview with his dad. I expect his best friend was unavailable. Compared to that kind of "news" I suppose "Accused rapist gets off but based on no evidence we want you to disbelieve it and hate him" is pretty serious, high brow stuff.

Kevin-W posted:

A case went to trial by jury, and the defendant as found not guilty. The media reported it. What is your problem?

True - but the headline gives the impression that the defence version of the events is incredible and the reference to "Saudi millionaire" ramps it up.

Interestingly the jury acquitted the defendant after only 30 minutes of deliberations and the Judge had allowed the accused to give evidence in private. 

I think it does show how difficult it is for any prosecution to get a rape or similar conviction in hte absence of third party corroborating evidence.

I actually think that if, for example, the Jimmy Savile "allegations" had gone to trial it is not unlikely that he would have been acquitted had he been able to come up with even a tenuous a "defence" - but for all that I'm not in convinced that changing the burden of proof is the answer.

Harry posted:

  It's like when a Sunday paper outed those pedophiles and some ordinary bloke got beaten up by a mob. Seems we don't learn.

It's not the same at all.

There is a huge difference in reporting a trial that was open to the public and the utterly egregious "let's out a paedo campaign" started up by Rebekah "Hacking cough" Brooks (nee Wade). That was a deeply cynical attempt to mobilise the mob mentality in order to boost circulation, which was widely condemned by the rest of the press community. Although it helped the Screws' circulation war  with the Sunday Mirror and the Sunday People.

As far as I am aware, nobody was actually beaten up as a result of this campaign, although a female paediatrician did have her house daubed with paint. Two men were awarded damages after they were wrongly identified as paedophiles (they in fact had the same names as two convicted men) and a third was awarded damages and received a public apology after his picture was accidentally used in connection with a convicted paedophile.

I agree with you that this particular campaign was cynical in the extreme and utterly reprehensible, but it has no connection to the case of Mr Abdulaziz.