Jack Diamond
- Thread starter Teessidemackem
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
That principle already exists imo mate, we're all innocent in law so no proof is needed ...
... I've only continued to post on this because, despite the not guilty verdict, there seems to be a little 'no smoke without fire' drifting around.
I think that's unfair.
I always find it interesting Scotland has not proven verdict.
In the eyes of the law not guilty is simple not guilty, there will be those who are guilty that get a not guilty and there will be not guilty people who get a guilty.
Burden of proof is much greater for prosecution and rightly so.
I sat on one trial during jury service that I was 90%+ sure the guy was guilty of possession with intent to supply, but I was a big advocate for not guilty as the police were lazy and didn't ask him in interview to give them access to his phones to show they weren't his dealer phones, the prosecution was also a bit ****e.
Still annoys me now thinking about it bloke was a dealer I'm quite sure of it, bottom of the food chain user himself who probably got paid in drugs. But there were gaps left by the investigation that the defence jumped through and offered an alternate theory that put enough doubt that I and the majority of the jury wasn't convinced beyond reasonable doubt. But I can say if the question was asked to you reckon to a large % of probability thay the guy is guilty then it would have been a different verdict.
In the eyes of the law not guilty is simple not guilty, there will be those who are guilty that get a not guilty and there will be not guilty people who get a guilty.
Burden of proof is much greater for prosecution and rightly so.
I sat on one trial during jury service that I was 90%+ sure the guy was guilty of possession with intent to supply, but I was a big advocate for not guilty as the police were lazy and didn't ask him in interview to give them access to his phones to show they weren't his dealer phones, the prosecution was also a bit ****e.
Still annoys me now thinking about it bloke was a dealer I'm quite sure of it, bottom of the food chain user himself who probably got paid in drugs. But there were gaps left by the investigation that the defence jumped through and offered an alternate theory that put enough doubt that I and the majority of the jury wasn't convinced beyond reasonable doubt. But I can say if the question was asked to you reckon to a large % of probability thay the guy is guilty then it would have been a different verdict.
I’m definitely not making a no smoke without fire issue with this one. That’s why I’ve deliberately included in my posts that my comments aren’t in relation to this case but more widely about the justice system. Someone mentioned semantics somewhere previously and I guess that’s what I was trying to point out. None of my comments relate to JD or the circumstances of his case just the system overall.
I've also interviewed (I was military police) a young girl who said she had been raped after going back with a young lad, she had all the tears etc.
His saving grace was he took her an her mate back. The mate said they both had consensual sex with him and she even woke up at one point to see the "victim' on top riding the lad!
This and a couple of other things gave the German police (I was posted there and she was a German national), a chance to go at ther story from a we don't believe you angle. Eventually she admitted she made it up because her boyfriend was a squaddie away on course for a few weeks and she panicked he would find out what she been up to.
His saving grace was he took her an her mate back. The mate said they both had consensual sex with him and she even woke up at one point to see the "victim' on top riding the lad!
This and a couple of other things gave the German police (I was posted there and she was a German national), a chance to go at ther story from a we don't believe you angle. Eventually she admitted she made it up because her boyfriend was a squaddie away on course for a few weeks and she panicked he would find out what she been up to.
No problem mate, I was responding generally, not to you specifically.
If so what will happen to all the sub-postmasters convicted of theft through a software error will they be exonerated and told they are innocent or will they just be told they were not guilty of the offence (semantics)
That's different. The convictions will be completely quashed
Yes, because the charges themselves are removed from their record. It's as if they never happened. So there isn't a guilty/not-guilty verdict recorded, the record is expunged.
I was just reading something about that earlier TC. Apparently quashing the convictions isn't that simple.
There are three ways of doing it.
- Royal Pardon
- Pushing a one off law through parliament, exonerating each one of them or
- The appeals process
The burden of proof lies with the accuser. A man (or woman) does not have to "prove" that they are innocent. Everyone is presumed to to be innocent until they have been found to be guilty by a court of law. And every man (or woman) has the right to justice. Justice found that Jack Diamond was innocent in 7 minutes. He is as innocent as the day before he was accused of an offence because a court of law could not prove beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the crime that same court accused him of.
So legally nobody will actually tell them they are innocent but will expunge the record as if it never happened and pretend to bury their heads in the sand while JD can not be told he was innocent of the charges however frivolous they may or may not have been and can only be told he was not guilty, whist the crown prosecution service who levelled the charges just pretend everything is ok even though they have wasted a considerable amount of tax payers money and time not to mention the damage done to a young mans reputation.
Some country we live in when people can not just look at situations with a sensible levelheaded approach or consider wording to remove the ambiguity from decisions taken. it is like the establishment will shoulder no blame from any side be it prosecution or defence and hide behind the aforementioned semantics of stupid decisions and poor policework from all involved.
Whilst it seems that JD has been railroaded these types of things are the reason that so many predators and miscreants are never brought to justice and why accusers of dubious morals are not thoroughly vetted ( I understand that we can not make the accuser the accused but at some point we have to make sure that the accused especially in these sensitive cases have some protection as well until found to be guilty or not as the damage and fall out can be irreversible) the very same reasons why normal people are often persecuted by police/councils/corporations.
I have sympathy for true victims in all of these instances but a hatred of the people who fabricate and try to destroy lives by using this type of complaint as a weapon and I get all the mental health stuff but to be honest that again should have very strict monitoring and IMO a frivolous accusation should be as severely dealt with as the actual accusation Crime/punishment. A false accusation of rape should hold the same sentencing as the rape.
We need to ensure that people are protected and that vindictive behavior is punished especially if people are trying to use the system for their own ends but at the same time make sure we don't make victims scared to come forward.
I don't know all the answers but I do know that what I have read regarding this case brings up a lot of very important social questions and to be honest more questions than answers I just know that good people will often use common sense to come to sensible conclusions.
Rant Owa today
Some country we live in when people can not just look at situations with a sensible levelheaded approach or consider wording to remove the ambiguity from decisions taken. it is like the establishment will shoulder no blame from any side be it prosecution or defence and hide behind the aforementioned semantics of stupid decisions and poor policework from all involved.
Whilst it seems that JD has been railroaded these types of things are the reason that so many predators and miscreants are never brought to justice and why accusers of dubious morals are not thoroughly vetted ( I understand that we can not make the accuser the accused but at some point we have to make sure that the accused especially in these sensitive cases have some protection as well until found to be guilty or not as the damage and fall out can be irreversible) the very same reasons why normal people are often persecuted by police/councils/corporations.
I have sympathy for true victims in all of these instances but a hatred of the people who fabricate and try to destroy lives by using this type of complaint as a weapon and I get all the mental health stuff but to be honest that again should have very strict monitoring and IMO a frivolous accusation should be as severely dealt with as the actual accusation Crime/punishment. A false accusation of rape should hold the same sentencing as the rape.
We need to ensure that people are protected and that vindictive behavior is punished especially if people are trying to use the system for their own ends but at the same time make sure we don't make victims scared to come forward.
I don't know all the answers but I do know that what I have read regarding this case brings up a lot of very important social questions and to be honest more questions than answers I just know that good people will often use common sense to come to sensible conclusions.
Rant Owa today
For those saying he won't get his career back on track. We've just played Preston who have a convicted rapist 
Back in the fold. Welcome back Jack lad.
https://safc.com/news/club-news/2024/january/club-statement-jack-diamond
https://safc.com/news/club-news/2024/january/club-statement-jack-diamond
Bit of an argument going on here about it 
https://fmttmboro.com/index.php?threads/jack-diamond.53999/
https://fmttmboro.com/index.php?threads/jack-diamond.53999/
I SUSPECT, that given the facts that have been disclosed so far, that ALL persons charged by The Post Office will be exonerated and compensated.
This may well include a few were guilty, but where the evidence used to convict can now be shown to have been unreliable.
IF, as seem likely, some senior Managers knew that their systems were flawed,but went ahead with prosecutions, I expect there to be calls that these people are now prosecuted.
Could this happen?
Vengence AND Justice at the same time!
The cynic in me is doubtfull.
