Brassed Off Britannia

Brassed Off Britannia

For a moan about the state of Britain and the World

 

 

 

Home   |   About BOB   |   Poetry   |   Contact Us   |   Forum Home

 
It is currently Sat Sep 21, 2019 8:34 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 6348
Here we go again. I've no axe to grind for ex MP Proctor, far from it, but a combination of the Police and Press seem to have set themselves up as judge and jury. He is accused by the Press of involvement in a young boys sex ring in which three boys were strangled, at least one by him. At a Press Conference Det Supt Kenny McDonald said they had interviewed the person making the accusation and found his evidence 'credible and true'.

Credible and true? Who the hell does McDonald think he is? If there is to be a murder charge it will be heard before a jury, every one of whom will be aware of that statement. How can Proctor possibly get a fair trial?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2014 3:56 pm
Posts: 1240
Quote:
How can Proctor possibly get a fair trial?


Everything is in hand Hooky.
As soon as John Chilcot puts his Iraq enquiry to bed he will get right onto this one. If all go's to form by the time he's finished everybody will either be dead or too senile to appear in court.
There seems to be a pattern emerging when it comes to the ruling classes looking after their own.

PS. Be careful with that axe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 10:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 6348
olderandwiser wrote:
Quote:
How can Proctor possibly get a fair trial?


Everything is in hand Hooky.
As soon as John Chilcot puts his Iraq enquiry to bed he will get right onto this one. If all go's to form by the time he's finished everybody will either be dead or too senile to appear in court.
There seems to be a pattern emerging when it comes to the ruling classes looking after their own.

PS. Be careful with that axe.


Can't follow your logic there. By the ruling classes I presume that's code for Tories and you seem to suggest they're looking after the Blair Government.

I see the Proctor case in a different light. The Police are becoming ever more political.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 8:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:56 pm
Posts: 9404
Location: Lake District, England
I found this on the BBC website:
"Asked about the claims, Det Supt Kenny McDonald - who is overseeing Operation Midland - said officers who had spoken to him thought his account was "credible and true". (My bold)

The "thought" puts a slightly different inflection on it. It's a difficult one about how much information should be given to the press, or more to the point, how much should be withheld, and if there is to be a right to confidentiality prior to trail does that apply to all accused or just famous people? It didn't apply to William Roach or the other celebrities accused of child abuse, so should it apply only to establishment figures?

Also, should the police be allowed to release names and information to the public as part of the operation to invite further evidence? To get witnesses to come forward? Surely we would not question it in the case of a bank robbery or murder - but this is about a possible murder or three. I don't know the answers, but whatever they are they must apply to everyone equally.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 8:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 6348
The answer in my opinion, is very simple. The Police should never release names until they have charged someone. In their search for witnesses by all means seek publicity but details of suspects must remain private. Didn't they learn anything from the Joanna Yeates affair?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 8:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:56 pm
Posts: 9404
Location: Lake District, England
But how could they seek witnesses without releasing the name? I agree that any other information related to the case should be withheld, including the opinions of interviewing officers who should know better. What should also be dealt with is the closing of an investigation on the grounds of "insufficient evidence" which leaves the accused having 'got away with it' and his reputation still ruined. There should be either evidence, or no evidence with a clear statement including the word 'innocent'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 9:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:21 am
Posts: 3402
Location: Surrey
The Scottish courts are able to return a verdict of 'not proven' - this would fit the bill if it were to be allowed in England..


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:56 pm
Posts: 9404
Location: Lake District, England
Even 'not proven' has an unwritten 'but' hanging on the end of it. What's wrong with 'not guilty' if the case hadn't been proved in court?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 6348
Cumberland Cockney wrote:
But how could they seek witnesses without releasing the name?


They have already published photographs and address of the alleged house where the alleged abuse and murders took place. I would have thought a question like 'Did you suffer abuse at the above address in the 1980's? If so please contact us. Your anonymity is assured', would be sufficient.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 4:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:56 pm
Posts: 9404
Location: Lake District, England
So if you want to abuse boys, never at the same address twice? No, as a general principle they'd have to give the name when seeking witnesses. But they do it for other crimes, why not this one? HP's problem is that he has form, which either means he done it or someone's after revenge. Given his known and confessed history I really couldn't give a monkey's.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 7:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 6348
Cumberland Cockney wrote:
Given his known and confessed history I really couldn't give a monkey's.


You couldn't give a monkey's? Neither could I, not about Proctor, but I could give a monkey's about the insidious creep of media 'justice'. It's a short step to mob rule, to the bleak world that Orwell forecast, in which the loudest voice decides who is guilty.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 7:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:56 pm
Posts: 1475
Location: Switzerland
Cumberland Cockney wrote:
Even 'not proven' has an unwritten 'but' hanging on the end of it.


That's exactly the point CC! Just because an individual, for whatever reason, is found "not guilty", doesn't mean to say that he/she is innocent of the crime of which they are charged. Take the Jeffrey Archer/"hostess" case as just one example!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 9:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:56 pm
Posts: 9404
Location: Lake District, England
They are innocent in law, Merry, and if we don't hold to that we are all at risk.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 6348
Cumberland Cockney wrote:
They are innocent in law, Merry, and if we don't hold to that we are all at risk.


How do you square that view (with which I agree) with your statement that as far as Proctor is concerned, you 'couldn't give a monkey's'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harvey Proctor
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 7:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:56 pm
Posts: 9404
Location: Lake District, England
Well spotted, Hooky, but I don't see any great disparity there. If Proctor is acquitted at trial I'll be happy to accept his innocence, but as an individual he is not high in my priorities list of people facing injustice. I have agreed that the police acted beyond their brief in issuing statements about his interview, although not in releasing his name since they do it for everyone else. I just don't care about Harvey Proctor who was once convicted of indecent behaviour for spanking and caning rent boys who were all under the then age of consent (21). I'm quite sure he went on to become an upright and decent member of society and the House of Commons.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group