Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 4,226
- Location
- Deep inside Uranus.
What's the point of his wife giving evidence? She's like he's never raped me so he can't be a rapist.
-
Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.
Russell Brand.
- Thread starter Von Smallhausen
- Start date
Well...yeah. character witness. Potential alibi or able to provide details of interactions with his accusors.
How about you spend less time
Last edited:
Hence “sound like”.
It doesn’t seem a leap given your apparent dismissal of the evidence being given.
I was just a bit confused about why you waited until after he was convicted to ask him to never contact you again, from what you said nothing really changed, you had no idea if he was guilty before he was convicted and no idea after. Many innocent people would take a deal to avoid prison even if it means getting a criminal record.
Innocent until proven guilty.
He went from professing his innocence to admitting his guilt to the court. Entering a guilty plea is accepting that you are guilty of the crime and he became a registered sex offender. Not sure what's hard to understand about my breaking off contact in light of that development.
Not really, its why plea bargains are problematic. If he hadn't been offered one id be in complete agreement with you but theyre essentially no different to torture.
You dont know what his state of mind was or whether he just couldnt afford to fight it anymore.
Therein lies the problem with plea bargains and why I think they shouldn't exist, agreeing to say that you are guilty of the crime doesn't mean that you are actually guilty of the crime.
Or maybe he pleaded guilty because he actually was guilty and knew that his story wouldn't stand up in court.
I can share another fact about the case - his first name was Jeremy.
Anyway, to keep this on topic I will be taking the same approach with Russell Brand. If he is found guilty or changes his plea to guilty, then I will take it that he really is guilty.
Perhaps, or perhaps they offered the plea deal because they weren't confident of getting a conviction, but we'll never know because he was offered a strong incentive to plead guilty.
Would've been a funny coincidence if my first name was Jeremy, but unfortunately not.
Brand won't be offered a plea deal to avoid prison so it's not the same. If he changes his plea to guilty when there's no incentive then yes, of course he'd be guilty. Also the number of women that have come forward to make allegations against him is very different to finding kiddie stuff on a shared computer.
Perhaps the point you're not considering is that we don't know whether he even was offered a plea deal, or if he was, what the rationale for it and terms of it might have been. All I know is what he claimed happened, but it could have been BS to try and cover up that his story blaming his ex wife for the images was just an excuse that would not be believed. Unlike with Russell Brand, there wasn't exactly heavy media coverage of the case and of course there wasn't an actual trial.
If he didn't go to prison I would assume it's true, it wouldn't make any sense to voluntarily plead guilty with no incentive and then tell people you're innocent.
Isn't there always the potential to reduce the punishment by pleading guilty and avoiding the need for a trial?
If you are 100% innocent (as he claimed he was, just like Russell Brand is claiming now) why wouldn't you want your day in court to clear your name?
If there was a possibility I could go to prison for something I was innocent of because a bitter ex had planted evidence on my computer, I for one would probably take a plea deal that avoided the possibility of prison if it was offered.
We don't really do plea deals in the UK, all you get is a discount on your sentence based on when you plead guilty.
You would also in this sort of case end up on the register and automatically locked out of certain jobs for life.
Not formally, but the CPS will sometimes agree to drop more serious charges if you plead guilty to lesser ones. Also the defence can ask for an indication of the likely sentence before entering a plea, so if the reduced sentence for pleading guilty results in no prison time then I'd do it.
Better than a stressful trial and prison in my opinion.
I see your logic but that’s not how it goes. It cost money, time and a load of stress.
And let’s assume he is innocent, there could be a miscarriage of justice and he could still be found guilty.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 9,325
I guess for certain crimes the publicity of the allegation is the biggest punishment. The **** show that was Operation Ore almost certainly led to many men admitting guilt rather than fight it out because even if you're found innocent many will stay think "no smoke without fire" for certain crimes. In some ways better to get on with your life and hope the least number of people know about it. Not a likely option for celebrities really.
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2019
- Posts
- 134
- Location
- The cold wet North East of England
Yes and the "justice system" gets even sicker than that. If an innocent person is in prison convicted of a serious violent indictable offence (GBH, rape, manslaughter, murder etc) and insists he/she is innocent then they will have to serve the entire prison sentence (despite having a history of good behaviour in custody), whereas if they admit to a crime they didn't commit and express remorse they will be released from prison years earlier.
Wrt to this plea deal discussion, I think people are confusing the US system (that we've all seen on TV) and our system. We dont have plea bargaining like we see the US do it.
Honestly, that sounds like he was lying to you as an excuse for why he pleaded guilty.
Only if they feel the evidence isnt robust enough for the more serious charge. The same way they wont actually go ahead with any prosecution if they dont feel the evidence is good enough.
They can ask, and be told what the potential maximum will be if you plead guilty at that time, but you still only get the normal reduction in sentence for pleading guilty early, and that reduction would then have to reduce the threshold from a custodial sentence to be eligible to be suspended.
Im not saying it cant/doesn't happen in the sentencing reduction for pleading guilty early, but you are making it sound like it works like the plea deal system in the US, which it doesnt since the prosecutors cant promise anything.
Honestly, that sounds like he was lying to you as an excuse for why he pleaded guilty.
Only if they feel the evidence isnt robust enough for the more serious charge. The same way they wont actually go ahead with any prosecution if they dont feel the evidence is good enough.
They can ask, and be told what the potential maximum will be if you plead guilty at that time, but you still only get the normal reduction in sentence for pleading guilty early, and that reduction would then have to reduce the threshold from a custodial sentence to be eligible to be suspended.
Im not saying it cant/doesn't happen in the sentencing reduction for pleading guilty early, but you are making it sound like it works like the plea deal system in the US, which it doesnt since the prosecutors cant promise anything.