View Full Version : No! No! Noooooo!
:angry: :mad:
Is it me or is that wrong? :readtheru
I agree with others, this is sending out the completely wrong message to rape victims. I no it may only be tv but still. :thumbsdow
Poor Bex! And after the 999 call in audio i was convinced they would waver her way. :wall:
And Pete. Grrrr Claire is so stupid. At the end, Pete said something about Bex having to pay for putting him through that and accusing him of it. :moonie: :sick:
So guys, Where do you think this will go? :confused:
Yes it is completely wrong but unfortunately this sort of thing happens every day in 'real life'.
he might still get found guilty like if claire tells the court ppl about wot pete told her or sumin, i dunno if tht will hapen tho im just makin it up!
crazyjkh
15-05-2005, 17:56
Totally the wrong message to people out there. And well out of order if Pete counter sues!
I for one am absolutely appalled by the verdict and yes it is only a TV drama but rape affects peopel everyday both men and women and this sends out completely the wrong message not only to victims but also the people who commit these crimes
Just because they had a previous relationship and the events leading up to it showed Bex flirting with him what does that say that she was asking for it because we all know she wasn't the message is clear about rapes if it happens report it
If you were a victim of rape and you saw what happened on Casualty would you want to report it NO you wouldn't people close to me have suffered such abuse at the hands of men and it makes me physically sick that he was shown to get away with a horrendous and humilating crime
Sorry for going on but i feel very strongly on this subject and felt up until the verdict the BBC handled it with great sensitivity and now they've completely ruined it in the name of a good drama
I just wanted to say I agree with your every word,I too know its only drama but some people have gone through this in real life and hoped for a guilty result.
pookie1968uk
15-05-2005, 22:53
yes, i was very suprised that they allowed him to get a not guilty verdict. it wont encourage rape victims to come forward will it?
Jessie Wallace
16-05-2005, 00:31
:angry: :mad:
So guys, Where do you think this will go? :confused:
He will probably end up try to sueing her for defination of character, the skum bag :mad:
I missed Casualty on Saturday so i've just found out the verdict from you guys! That is absolutly terrible, he should have been put away! But unfortunatly this does happen a lot in real life too, just goes to show what our justice system is like! :rolleyes:
I agree - the verdict was disgusting. Its sends out completely the wrong message to other victims. Yes I know this happens, but shouldn't we be encouraging people to report these offences, not hiding because they know nothing will come of it. And he can't be tried again for the offence, even though Claire knows what really happened, cause you can't be tried twice for the same offence (is this still right??) Completely wrong, just like the Little Mo and Trevor domestic violence case in Eastenders - Not happy!!!
it is sending the wrong message out to Victims of Rape they might be to scared to come Forward for the fear of not been Believed
parkerman
16-05-2005, 12:24
I agree - the verdict was disgusting. Its sends out completely the wrong message to other victims. Yes I know this happens, but shouldn't we be encouraging people to report these offences, not hiding because they know nothing will come of it. And he can't be tried again for the offence, even though Claire knows what really happened, cause you can't be tried twice for the same offence (is this still right??) Completely wrong, just like the Little Mo and Trevor domestic violence case in Eastenders - Not happy!!!
I agree. Completely the wrong message. After all Bex went through to then be branded, in effect, a liar, how is that going to encourage women with similar experiences to come forward. The BBC should be ashamed of themselves.
However, it is not correct that you can't be tried for the same offence twice. The law on double jeopardy was changed a couple of years ago, so Pete could be retried. Nevertheless it would mean Bex having to go through all that again. So, even if she wins, it would still be the wrong message to give.
He only be tried again through Physical evidence not what Claire said it's just hear say she should have said it origianlly it won't be admissable in court
parkerman
16-05-2005, 13:28
Well that depends...A retrial can be ordered if there is compelling evidence such as DNA material, new witnesses or a confession comes to light.
If Claire decides to come forward and tell the truth it may be accepted as new evidence as it is the report of a direct confession from Pete, which is why it was felt to be admissable in the first trial rather than being ruled out as hearsay.
So could Claire go to the courst now? And she wouldn't be charged for withholding evidence?
I don't htink she will but maby she will threaten Pete with this to leave Bex alone...
xXx
I was so shocked when I heard the jury say not guilty!!! I was not expecting that! It's obvious he raped Bex...she sounded so upset and panicky on the 999 call! Can't she appeal or anytyhing?
parkerman
16-05-2005, 16:58
So could Claire go to the courst now? And she wouldn't be charged for withholding evidence?
Ah, well, that's the problem isn't it? Yes, she probably would be charged for withholding evidence...
samantha nixon
16-05-2005, 18:21
i thought it would go her way as well but it didnt
Angeldelight
17-05-2005, 15:40
Well that depends...A retrial can be ordered if there is compelling evidence such as DNA material, new witnesses or a confession comes to light.
If Claire decides to come forward and tell the truth it may be accepted as new evidence as it is the report of a direct confession from Pete, which is why it was felt to be admissable in the first trial rather than being ruled out as hearsay.
but if it was admissible why didn't LUKE or CLAIRE tell the DEFENSE in the first place, J_B_L is right it has to be phyiscal evidence, a witness. A Confession will only Bring Bex some sort of Peace.....
parkerman
17-05-2005, 16:17
Did you miss an episode?
Claire told Luke and Luke discussed it with Bex's counsel who said Claire's evidence WOULD be admissable as it wasn't hearsay but a direct confession from Pete. Claire agreed to tell the court but she didn't go through with it.
Under current law it does not have to be physical evidence. A direct confession could be enough to retry Pete.
so really even if clare came forward it wouldn't do any good if he can't be tried again
parkerman
17-05-2005, 18:27
He can be tried again!!!
Angeldelight
17-05-2005, 18:40
Did you miss an episode?
Claire told Luke and Luke discussed it with Bex's counsel who said Claire's evidence WOULD be admissable as it wasn't hearsay but a direct confession from Pete. Claire agreed to tell the court but she didn't go through with it.
Under current law it does not have to be physical evidence. A direct confession could be enough to retry Pete.
So why didn't the Defense ask her????? if it was admisiable and she told them, they would be able to ask her about it in court and they DIDN'T!!!!
So why didn't the Defense ask her????? if it was admisiable and she told them, they would be able to ask her about it in court and they DIDN'T!!!!
The defense couldnt ask her as luke asked the defense lawyer the question hypothetically. Claire's evidence would be enough to launch a retrial, pete sueing for slander etc might be enough to sway her to tell the truth. But I think none of this will happen due to the rumours about bex's exit at the end of the season
Angeldelight
17-05-2005, 23:19
she would have to told the defence lawyer about what he said and she didn't so they couldn't ask her about it in court.... well if he begins a case of dafamation and loss of income.... it could all become too much for Bex.... i think she's guna take an overdose...
Because she DID NOT say anyhting in the original trial her evidence ALONE will not be enough for a re-trial it's only hearsay if she had said something in the origianl trial t's different but Claire's evidence won't be enough
parkerman
18-05-2005, 13:46
Why would it be hearsay now but wouldn't have been at the original trial?
Potato1992
06-06-2005, 18:21
it was a bad decision :cheer:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.