So a victim without third party evidence will never get access to justice?

The victim was judged to be credible, it's a serious allegation, so that allegation should be tested. Who knows, he may well have admitted to it or tripped himself up under cross-examination.

Her account was tested in court, as was his, a jury decided that his verison of events was more credible.

That is how the justice system works.

The alternative is that an individual who cannot prove that something happened - the classic 'my word against his' scenario - will always be denied an opportunity to receive justice. There are countless incidents where a case boils down to exactly that - bugger all evidence bar the testimony of the two individuals concerned, and the accused already gets a huge benefit of the doubt in such a scenario anyway.

The real travesty is not that this case came to court - if her story was credible then it absolutely should have been tested in court - it is that his identity was revealed prior to the jury's decision.

That he is now unfairly branded a dodgy character is not the fault of the girl. it is not the fault of the CPS, nor is it the fault of the fact he actually looks a bit shady. It is the fault of a system that does not give the accused any anonymity.

Posted By: CWC, Sep 10, 16:54:47