View Full Version : Went to public viewing gallery at Leeds Crown Court yesterday
Never heard such filth in my life!
I went with school, and about 15 other people and so we split into groups as there was a fair few of us and our teacher wanted us to see different ones... 6 of us went into one, and then the other 10 went into other court rooms, and well theres lasted about 10 minutes and they went into two or three court rooms and made the bus at Noon to go home, wheras my group went into a court room at half past 10 and didn't come out until 1pm. :l (We werent allowed to leave apprantly, although I knew we were technically allowed but I felt rude). Anyway, I wrote this thread to tell you what we got..
A rape case. Not just any rape case, a famil rape case. Yes. (Do not read on if you are senstive to this subject)
Dirty old man raped his daughter, his sister, and his neice. I was absolutely gobsmacked that we got this case. The judge had to go into every single little detail of what the man did and how he did it when he was talking to the jury and it was absolutely vile. The dirty old man was sat in his little glass box with absolutely no facial expression listening to the whole thing go on (this was the second part of the hearing). Anyway, it was a lenghty court thing, and unfortunately we did have to go when they broke for lunch so never got to hear the verdict, but he was definately guilty (and pleaded guilty in the first court thing) and was going down for the rest of his life. The scarier part was, he was ALLOWED TO WALK AROUND THE MAIN PART OF THE COURT WHERE WE WERE FREELY! *Innocent until proven guilty* as they say. So he was free to move about, he looked like scum and is scum! Couldn't believe it when we got that! :(
How long do you think he should get? Rest of his life?
Suspective
25-03-2011, 06:26 PM
I've always wanted to visit and observe a court in progress, and it sounds like a very complex and astonishing case to be watching.
This man sounds like a total **** and deserves to be put away for the rest of his life. If he finds it necessary to rape that many family members, he must be a total scumbag.
Its disgusting and gives me the shivers just thinking about it. He shouldn't be allowed near anyone for years if not life, and quite frankly I'm surprised he managed to rape that many relatives before he was caught, arrested and charged.
FlyingJesus
25-03-2011, 06:29 PM
3 life sentences at the very least, if not further sentencing for other details. I did work experience at my local law courts and all I got to see was a dispute about curtains
IceNineKills
25-03-2011, 06:32 PM
probs no room in the jails so he'll be free soon.
It happened the first time 30 years and and then again 3 years ago (not sure about the other one) and those 2 were too scared to tell anyone but one girl came out and the other backed her up. its disgusting to be honest. he said "dont tell anyone and ill get you a horse" cos he knew she loved horses.
Chris
25-03-2011, 06:55 PM
That sounds awful. I reckon he'll get life imprisonment .
scott
25-03-2011, 07:00 PM
That's horrible. When I just turned 18 I to go and do jury duty. I was in the court room for about 4 hours thankfully I never got picked, It was a case the same as yours but 2 guys and it was with about 5 underage kids. The 2 guys were sat behind the glass just having a laugh with their self was horrible! :(
FlyingJesus
25-03-2011, 07:04 PM
Did he actually get her a horse
No the *******
Did he actually get her a horse
Chippiewill
26-03-2011, 12:29 AM
Did he actually get her a horse
If he did then they're such ******* for telling on him like, wow, can't you rape someone and bribe them off nowadays?
Edit: eek 5k+1 posts :D
Conservative,
26-03-2011, 12:36 AM
He should get the death sentences for that.
Oh sorry, this is Britain, we outlawed it 60 years ago. :l
Jordy
26-03-2011, 12:34 PM
He should get the death sentences for that.
Oh sorry, this is Britain, we outlawed it 60 years ago. :lThe last thing this forum needs is another Undertaker, one is quite ample.
Cheryl
26-03-2011, 02:13 PM
He should get the death sentences for that.
Oh sorry, this is Britain, we outlawed it 60 years ago. :l
I fail to see in any way, how you are portraying yourself a conservative. None of your views correspond to being conservative. Do you actually support the Torries/ agree with their policies or do you just have the name to make you seem more adult/grown up than you actually are?
Mathew
26-03-2011, 03:02 PM
I'd actually really like to go to watch a court case. I think my local newspaper is taking me to one when I go for Work Shadowing in a couple of months, but I'm not too sure yet.
Funny this should come up now, I'm just reading about the court case in To Kill a Mockingbird (which is oddly making me ashamed to be white :P).
Just disgusting! I'd say life, how could you do that? Eww. Still carnt believe those 8 year olds raped a 6 year old! Or something like that.
Uhmm... are you allowed to discuss that? lol?
Marbian
26-03-2011, 04:26 PM
What a dirty man... Life.
Jordy
26-03-2011, 05:55 PM
Uhmm... are you allowed to discuss that? lol?If someone off the street could walk in (Maybe a journalist) and watch the court case unfold, there's no reason why word can't be spread. 'tis the essence of the justice system.
-:Undertaker:-
27-03-2011, 03:07 PM
The man in question will probably only get a pitiful sentence as most criminals in this country now get (if they get punished at all, personally I wouldn't call a British prison a punishment). Innocent until prove guilty is very important though, habeus corpus is one of our most prized pieces of history and legislation although sadly they are being eroded away.
I'd be more worried if he ends up in one of those open 'prisons'.
I fail to see in any way, how you are portraying yourself a conservative. None of your views correspond to being conservative. Do you actually support the Torries/ agree with their policies or do you just have the name to make you seem more adult/grown up than you actually are?
The Conservative Party is not conservative.
The last thing this forum needs is another Undertaker, one is quite ample.
Or another smart arse.
I'm afraid myself and Conservative are in the 50%+ who want the return of the death penalty, so don't make us out to be a small cracked minority.
Arron
27-03-2011, 06:20 PM
It's an indictable offence (right?)
I'd say 12 years minimum.
FlyingJesus
27-03-2011, 06:33 PM
It's an indictable offence (right?)
I'd say 12 years minimum.
Under what criteria? An indictment is ANY offense punishable by law lol you seem to just be throwing out words
Conservative,
27-03-2011, 06:37 PM
The last thing this forum needs is another Undertaker, one is quite ample.
I'm not another Dan. We differ on quite a few things tbh.
I fail to see in any way, how you are portraying yourself a conservative. None of your views correspond to being conservative. Do you actually support the Torries/ agree with their policies or do you just have the name to make you seem more adult/grown up than you actually are?
As Dan said - the Conservatives are hardly conservative anymore. My views are often in line with theirs. Please name me 1 person whose views are exactly in line with EVERY policy of the party they support? In the last few days I have considered changing my name to Right-Wing but I can't be bothered because it means making a new habbo account etc. It's not because I want to look grown up because I can look grown up without a posh name.
I just thing crimes like this should be punished in a much harsher way than 12 year prison. People say death is the easy way out, but it's not. Death means they can't come back, and for some of the criminals, that is the best for thing for the public.
Arron
27-03-2011, 06:55 PM
Indictable is a severe offence such as Rape, Manslaughter & Murder?
GommeInc
27-03-2011, 06:57 PM
I'd actually really like to go to watch a court case. I think my local newspaper is taking me to one when I go for Work Shadowing in a couple of months, but I'm not too sure yet.
I highly recommend going to see a court case :) They are nothing like what you see in television programmes like Coronation Street, so it's quite interesting to see how different they are :) I went to see a case in London's Crown Court where I believe it was a rape case or GBH case (it was a long time ago :P). You have to be so quiet though, you feel awkward if you're coming in mid-way.
I just thing crimes like this should be punished in a much harsher way than 12 year prison. People say death is the easy way out, but it's not. Death means they can't come back, and for some of the criminals, that is the best for thing for the public.
I suggest you read the thread in the debates forum about the death sentence, it's pointless and a waste of resources :P That said, I find the prison sector a bit useless and not as harsh as it could be, but that's a debate for another day.
Conservative,
27-03-2011, 07:04 PM
I highly recommend going to see a court case :) They are nothing like what you see in television programmes like Coronation Street, so it's quite interesting to see how different they are :) I went to see a case in London's Crown Court where I believe it was a rape case or GBH case (it was a long time ago :P). You have to be so quiet though, you feel awkward if you're coming in mid-way.
I suggest you read the thread in the debates forum about the death sentence, it's pointless and a waste of resources :P That said, I find the prison sector a bit useless and not as harsh as it could be, but that's a debate for another day.
I believe I took part in that debate and I still believe the death sentence is needed unless the justice system is given a real shake up and sentences are a lot harsher.
GommeInc
27-03-2011, 07:08 PM
I believe I took part in that debate and I still believe the death sentence is needed unless the justice system is given a real shake up and sentences are a lot harsher.
But as the facts and statistics in that thread suggest, it wouldn't do anything other than cost a lot. It doesn't stop people offending, people rarely break the law in a way which would be punishable by death and re-offending is dropping and crime in general is going towards petty crime and GBH. We don't need it, we just need a better prison system at the end of the day. If the prison system because harsher, then the justice system will probably become harsher to allow longer prison sentences and punishments.
FlyingJesus
27-03-2011, 07:08 PM
Indictable is a severe offence such as Rape, Manslaughter & Murder?
Those offences can only be tried on indictments, but not all indictable offences are of such high prominence lol, but an indictment in itself is literally any criminal accusation
Jessicrawrr
27-03-2011, 08:12 PM
death.
How could someone do that to children, nevermind family.
Disgusting man, shouldn't ever ever ever be allowed back into the public.
You're not allowed to discuss it actually. Rape victims need to remain anonymous unless they choose not to, and by saying how they are related to the accused you are identifying them. It's actually illegal so this thread should probably be deleted?
GommeInc
28-03-2011, 01:56 PM
You're not allowed to discuss it actually. Rape victims need to remain anonymous unless they choose not to, and by saying how they are related to the accused you are identifying them. It's actually illegal so this thread should probably be deleted?
Eh? Since when did someone release names, pictures, locations and ages of victims and accused? :S It's not illegal when there are no identifiable pieces of information...
Who said anything about names and pictures? It's called jigsaw identification. If someone finds out the name of the guy who is on trial then they can find out who the rape victims are by looking who is his daughter, sister and neice...
GommeInc
28-03-2011, 02:02 PM
Who said anything about names and pictures? It's called jigsaw identification. If someone finds out the name of the guy who is on trial then they can find out who the rape victims are by looking who is his daughter, sister and neice...
You do know you can get this information freely by just going straight to the Crown Courts? It's not illegal... If it was they wouldn't have a "public gallery" and let the public know what happens... You said it yourself, there is no mention of names, thus it's not illegal.
FlyingJesus
28-03-2011, 02:03 PM
Who said anything about names and pictures? It's called jigsaw identification. If someone finds out the name of the guy who is on trial then they can find out who the rape victims are by looking who is his daughter, sister and neice...
Because there has obv only been 1 rape trial ever right
You can be sarcastic if you want. The fact remains that it is illegal to publish anything which may identify a rape victim. Simple law. Thread reported.
GommeInc
28-03-2011, 02:18 PM
You can be sarcastic if you want. The fact remains that it is illegal to publish anything which may identify a rape victim. Simple law. Thread reported.
Where are these snippets of identifiable pieces of information? I would also like to see your sources for turning a good thread into a pointless thread because you do not appear to understand how public galleries and the legal system works...
The fact that thread starter said who the guy had raped. Once you know his name you can find out who the relatives are. It's OK to know it. Just not to publish it. Why is that so hard to understand? My source? Call it a degree in Journalism with pretty much the entire last year spent specialising in Law and Propaganda.
Janet Snakehole
28-03-2011, 02:26 PM
Stuff like that is just unforgivable. It's disgusting. I hope he gets life, I really do.
Lol, would anyone like to own up to the negative "stop being so arogant" rep? Not being arrogant, just making a point which is true.
GommeInc
28-03-2011, 02:36 PM
The fact that thread starter said who the guy had raped. Once you know his name you can find out who the relatives are. It's OK to know it. Just not to publish it. Why is that so hard to understand? My source? Call it a degree in Journalism with pretty much the entire last year spent specialising in Law and Propaganda.
Yet his name doesn't appear to of been published... You do know it is legal to discuss court cases? There are different laws regarding journalism. Journalism is literally following the case and publishing explicit details for a wide audience which is illegal, especially if names are involved - broadcasting laws follow the same sort of rules too. Law firms publish cases they have been involved in, usually in Regina v. someone (date) format, and you can find out the details by looking over the case notes in the same way we are doing now, you could literally find out who someone has raped by age, gender, location and relation. IF it was illegal, law degrees would cease to exist because you couldn't cite court cases.
As I said before, it's jigsaw identification. I'm not even going to bother to read all of that because I know it's irrelevant. This is a source of news for some people. Therefore it is subject to the same rules. And so it is illegal to identify rape victims. End of. Off to work, talk later <3 x
GommeInc
28-03-2011, 02:53 PM
As I said before, it's jigsaw identification. I'm not even going to bother to read all of that because I know it's irrelevant. This is a source of news for some people. Therefore it is subject to the same rules. And so it is illegal to identify rape victims. End of. Off to work, talk later <3 x
Interesting you're doing this "I know I'm right and you're wrong" tactic. It is illegal to publish current court cases if there hasn't been a conclusion because the articles could be making unbiased claims directed at the defendant. This thread isn't giving any information, you use jigsaw identification in the wrong context and assume it is an official, legal term, when jigsaw identification is an attempt at finding individuals through tiny snippets of information - you assume you can find someones name by these details, yet it's near enough impossible especially when names are not absolute-indentifiable pieces of information. Jon Venable is a good case for this, because no-one knows who he is other than by name and the same for Bulger's family who I believe are hidden away. You do know case notes are released to the public? You could find out the victims from these notes if you really wanted, not that it would work when victims are usually protected - names are not usually mentioned and when they are it's like searching for a needle in a hay stack. So yeah, not sure what your point is when it isn't illegal.
In short, if it was illegal, they simply wouldn't let the general public into court cases and release case notes afterwards. This discussion is well within the law as there has been no identifiable information other than relation - you really do need names and locations to identify someone - how can you find these people when there is no information about them? :P
FlyingJesus
28-03-2011, 04:15 PM
As I said before, it's jigsaw identification. I'm not even going to bother to read all of that because I know it's irrelevant. This is a source of news for some people. Therefore it is subject to the same rules. And so it is illegal to identify rape victims. End of. Off to work, talk later <3 x
No names, locations or anything else that can be used to indentify anyone from the case (no matter how many jigsaws you want to chat about) have been mentioned in any way. If what you're claiming is true then it's illegal to ever say that someone got raped. Repeating yourself isn't the same thing as being right
Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.