Englishman jailed for 3.5 years for transmitting HIV to partner.

[Belfast-Bottom]

http://news.sky.com/story/1016802/man-jailed-for-infecting-his-partner-with-hiv

[lukeboybare]

suppose my wonder is how do they prove he never told her and could she be using it as revenge on him ....

[bb1991]

suppose my wonder is how do they prove he never told her and could she be using it as revenge on him ....

It's a problem with the UK legal system in general. So often it's one person's word against the other; the police (and a jury if it gets that far) always believe the person making the accusation - so it can be as simple as getting in there first.

Some friends went through it a few years ago -some got police cautions and eventually ASBOs for swearing, threatening and violence against a woman. They had been playing football in their cul-de-sac; the woman had come out swore at them all and slapped one - they didn't report it but she made false claims against them. The police didn't believe their version of events because she had made the accusation first.

I have another friend who went through something similar whilst at work- they attacked her but then contacted the police first; so she got the criminal record and they got off scot free.

It's not involving the police, but I know another guy that lost his job when a customer accused him of calling her an idiot; he says he didn't, and she has no way to prove he did, but he was fired anyway.

Another problem with the UK Legal system is the fact you get 'police cautions' (which go on your criminal record) or that most criminal cases are tried by magistrates (meaning no jury- the magistrate just decides whether your guilty or not) means you'd probably never get your chance to plead your case to a jury and hope that they might veer on the side of caution.

But even if your just arrested, and then released without charge, the arrest will still be on your criminal record and could stop you getting a job if they do a CRB check.

I'm not saying that's what happened in this situation or that this girl was lying or that she did it for revenge (the guy could be the evil bastard the media will no doubt make him out to be): just that it's very possible (and far to easy in my opinion) to land someone in it, and ruin their lives with these "my word vs yours" situations and does happen very very often.

Edited November 27, 2012 by bb1991
added more info

[marcsoton]

Hate to point this out but you can only get a police caution if you admit that you're guilty of the offence. If they weren't guilty, why were you friends admitting they were?

What's so different between pleading your case in front of magistrates (non-legally qualified members of the public) as opposed to a jury (non-legally qualified members of the public) other than the number (3 magistrates as opposed to 12 jurors)? After all, according to you, jurors always believe the person making the accusation in any event so it's not going to make any difference is it?

Arrests may appear on someone's 'criminal record' but only if you mean by that an enhanced CRB check and, typically, they would only appear if relevant to the nature of the check. For example, you might have been arrested on child pornography offences and be awaiting a charging decision by the CPS when you apply for a job working with children. What would be the problem with the fact that you'd been arrested for child pornography offences being disclosed to your potential employer? Arrests do not appear on PNC printouts but warnings, final warnings, and cautions do.

[bb1991]

It's pretty much human nature; Person A comes to you saying that they've been attacked by Person B- you ask Person B; they never touched them but Person A actually attacked them. -Who do you believe. It's human nature that you'd believe the first person to make the accusation, and think that any counter claims were just them trying to get off or shift focus.

Just because it's human nature doesn't mean it's right and people shouldn't be able to use it to their advantage in the legal system.

All the staff at work have to have CRBs- only those who have to deal with kids have enhanced ones: arrests come back on the standard ones too- even those arrests not relevant to the job. We had a few guys that were really shocked that their arrests were on there because they had been released without charge. One guy was really distraught- arrested following the riots and released without charge- he says the only reason they arrested him was because he was black- but it's on his CRB regardless.

The friends in my first example, they got the cautions because they admitted to swearing at her when she attacked them. Lets face it, someone swears at you and attacks you, you'll probably swear back- swearing is illegal in the UK and is classed as a public order offence. They admitted they swore - they got a police caution.

It went to the magistrates with the 3 others.

A jury is told they must be beyond reasonable doubt to convict people, and studies show they generally judge on the cautious side. Trial by a jury of your peers is supposed to be what the British justice system is all about, but only 5% of cases are tried in Crown Court.

The rest go through Magistrates courts, which mean no jury; just the magistrate who isn't a professional, he's an unpaid volunteer whose been on a training course. -even if they did have a legal degree or were trained lawyers, it doesn't qualify them to decide who's guilty or innocent.

Magistrates might be able to expose the truth and make the correct ruling in other cases; but when it comes to one persons word against the other- in every case I've seen, it's the one who makes the complaint gets off scot free.

The only way it would ever go the other way is if the one who makes the complaint gets their story mixed up.

Anyway- I could write a few anthologies of the problems of the British Political and Judical system, but enough politics - it's not what we come to this site for

Edited November 28, 2012 by bb1991