Sil Fox cleared (Very clear video evidence of lies of accuser)

maestroamado

The Judiciary are so tight in this country that as someone said earlier that they all get paid.
The only good that came from this is they may be exposed in some way if case taken against DPP.
For them its all just a game but there are consequences for the people involved.
Most legal people i have come across are parasites, faceless people...

silverharp

it reminds me of the Mark Pearson case in the UK train station case, the GOT actress is swanning around like nothing happened

Spon Farmer

I wonder did the woman ask for the photo with the intention of making an accusation.

It is mad that it went on for two years when they must have had the CCTV footage fairly early on. He would have known he'd been cleared but must have been maddening that he couldn't tell anyone.

How many celebrities put hands on people when asked for photos ?

Also just to respond to a comment in the OP - no, Is Fox is not remotely funny

Spon Farmer

silverharp wrote: »

it reminds me of the Mark Pearson case in the UK train station case, the GOT actress is swanning around like nothing happened

Just looked that up and it is bizarre.

It takes a moment for them to pass each other. It is a busy train station, if the man did brush off her the actress could forgiven for thinking it might be deliberate but he was "accused of sexually assaulting the award-winning actress, who cannot be named for legal reasons, by penetration"

What the hell?

glenfieldman

silverharp wrote: »

it reminds me of the Mark Pearson case in the UK train station case, the GOT actress is swanning around like nothing happened

any chance of her initials please

silverharp

glenfieldman wrote: »

any chance of her initials please

S F

Spon Farmer

silverharp wrote: »

S F

How do you know who she is?

Or are those letters internet code for something else?

glenfieldman

silverharp wrote: »

S F

Got it, thanks

Rubberchikken

It's cases like this that reinforce my distrust in the Asg and have made me think the office of the Door is manned by a bunch of idiots controlled by dubious decision makers.

Spon Farmer

Spon Farmer wrote: »

How do you know who she is?

Or are those letters internet code for something else?

You do a very basic search on the internet and read about all the details at non-British media outlets.

Spon Farmer

JayZeus wrote: »

You do a very basic search on the internet and read about all the details at non-British media outlets.

I had not actually been interested in who she was just how silverharp knew and how he knew it was true

if finding said information is not what you call a basic search I wonder what you call my search methods :P

anyway never heard of her and didn't look into who she played

I'm more interested in the accusation itself

he passed her in mere moments and there is no way he could have done what she said. even if the CPS slowed down the tape as was claimed it still makes no sense. why did the police even pursue it?

silverharp

Spon Farmer wrote: »

How do you know who she is?

Or are those letters internet code for something else?

it was just out there at the time, I cant remember the back story now, it will come up on a google search

Spon Farmer

silverharp wrote: »

it was just out there at the time, I cant remember the back story now, it will come up on a google search

yes I just had to search a harder than I usually do

silver2020

The gardai managing the case have questions to answer.

In too many situations gadai make the assumption of guilt based on one side of the story and are deaf to the other side and fail to do a proper investigation.

If the gardai involved here had the competence and actually checked the video and made the right enquiries, there would not have been a case.

The DPP act on the information that gardai provide and unfortunately do not double check the evidence themselves.

It was clear from very early in the case that this was ineptitude by the gardai involved and clear lies by the person who made the allegations.


Sil Fox will take a case against the state and only if the state defends it or agreement not reached will it actually get to court and the gardai involved asked to answer for their malicious handling of this.

I really hope he refuses all offers of settlement as there are far too many cases of garda stupidity/incompetence out there.

For Forks Sake

silverharp wrote: »

it reminds me of the Mark Pearson case in the UK train station case, the GOT actress is swanning around like nothing happened

That is a bizarre case, should never have gotten anywhere near a courtroom

Silentcorner

For Forks Sake wrote: »

That is a bizarre case, should never have gotten anywhere near a courtroom

Evidence is no longer enough to keep you out of a courtroom, these decisions are political.

silver2020

Silentcorner wrote: »

Evidence is no longer enough to keep you out of a courtroom, these decisions are political.

No, its incompetent gardai that now make the decisions and the dpp mostly goes by their recommendations.

They even run with cases brought by gardai just a few months out of templemore - I know someone that had such case and she's in the midst of a case against the state.

Funny, the ombudsman can't investigate such behaviour by gardai.

Hoboo

silver2020 wrote: »

No, its incompetent gardai that now make the decisions and the dpp mostly goes by their recommendations.

They even run with cases brought by gardai just a few months out of templemore - I know someone that had such case and she's in the midst of a case against the state.

Funny, the ombudsman can't investigate such behaviour by gardai.

And who's operating all the strings you mentioned. Gardai do as they're told.

Triangle

ollkiller wrote: »

No way should she be named. If she was named and with the obligatory trashing on social media it will only stop real victims coming forward. Of course I would agree with the defendant not being named until proven guilty. That's where the problem lies.

Irrespective of her being named. She should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Jail time is suitable for this level of deceit. Wasting court time and damaging someone's reputation.
It needs to be on her record for future reference.

jprender

ollkiller wrote: »

No way should she be named. If she was named and with the obligatory trashing on social media it will only stop real victims coming forward. Of course I would agree with the defendant not being named until proven guilty. That's where the problem lies.

Ah hang on....

The problem wasn’t that the defendant was named,

The problem was that the accuser was an out and out liar, who thought nothing of trying to destroy the life of an innocent man.

Let’s not lose sight of this fact.

Spon Farmer

For Forks Sake wrote: »

That is a bizarre case, should never have gotten anywhere near a courtroom

A courtroom?

I cannot even understand how it got to the point that Pearson himself even heard about it. Unless the detective in charge thought the "suspect" had telekinetic powers or was The Flash I see no reason they'd even bother to look for Pearson.:rolleyes:

Spon Farmer

jprender wrote: »

Ah hang on....

The problem wasn’t that the defendant was named,

The problem was that the accuser was an out and out liar, who thought nothing of trying to destroy the life of an innocent man.

Let’s not lose sight of this fact.

ollkiller has a point.

Liar or not if this woman got abuse it could prevent an actual victim reporting something because she would worry people would not believe because of the deceit.

But I would worry at not naming the accused in a serious case because what if he got of on some technicality. his identity being public can increase the chance of the next victim protecting themselves

of course you can have abs innocent man ruined too

very confusing to be honest

Spon Farmer

I was just reading a little more about it and I copped something I overlooked earlier.

Sil Fox's job is comedian? Like he does gigs and makes his money that way?

I thought he was just a friend of Joe Duffy.

People must have money to burn.

Higgins5473

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I was just reading a little more about it and I copped something I overlooked earlier.

Sil Fox's job is comedian? Like he does gigs and makes his money that way?

I thought he was just a friend of Joe Duffy.

People must have money to burn.

What’s your point? Aside from the fact that clearly haven’t read a single article related to this case as every single one starts with “Veteran comedian Sil Fox...” ‘so overlooked and just copped’ seems a bit odd.

Or are you just looking to have a pop at an old man who has presumably gone through hell the last while?

Liamo57

The poor man. I wish him all the best, he deserves it. What an awful crime to be accused of. She should be made to apologise in a public forum. I hope he gets due compensation from the state

suicide_circus

I hope Sil wins big in court and whoever in the Gardai and the DDP made the decision to go ahead with this case are asked wtf the were playing at.

Rodin

She must be prosecuted. End of.
An example must be set and justice must be done and seen to be done

suicide_circus

Rodin wrote: »

She must be prosecuted. End of.
An example must be set and justice must be done and seen to be done

Perhaps Sil can take a civil case against her as I imagine there will be no appetite from the state to go after her.

Widdensushi

Rodin wrote: »

She must be prosecuted. End of.
An example must be set and justice must be done and seen to be done

Exactly, this is a crime not just against him but against every woman who has a legitimate complaint

Higgins5473

suicide_circus wrote: »

Perhaps Sil can take a civil case against her as I imagine there will be no appetite from the state to go after her.

This issue is trying to extract the funds from scum such as herself. The courts can award hefty sums of money in civil cases and all you will be left with is a large legal bill yourself.