FabSwingers.com forum: Retribution for Michael Le Vell

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

From reading the evidence presented in the above case it was very obvious that the teenager was lying. There was no physical injury, DNA or witness evidence. In the circumstances it would be appropriate for Michael Le Vell to take out a Civil Court action against the teenager and in doing so one would hope that she would not be allowed anonymity.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If she's under 16 and by Law she will never be named. Unless the media find her...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

How old is she now?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

I don't think so....regardless if it is found out that she has lied which without evidence I cannot conclude it has...what is the point of dragging it all up again for a bit of dosh....he has been found not guilty is that not enough...he won the battle don't mean he has to win the whole bloody war...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If the lack of evidence is to be believed are the CPS not also responsible?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ustyBrunette35Couple
over a year ago

birmingham

The media will know who she is

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

under the law the age cant be revile or identity

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

its unfair that his life will never be the same again as some ppl will still think he did it and he will have to live with that for the rest of his life but the girl/woman will be able to continue her life as if nothing had happened.i dont think thats fair and i would be speaking to my solicitor to see what my options are

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

[Removed by poster at 11/09/13 18:29:13]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

There's seldom evidence in historic rape cases. It almost always only comes down to who the jury believes.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

".......i dont think thats fair and i would be speaking to my solicitor to see what my options are"

A sensible solicitor will suggest 'keep your head down, go back to work and try to rebuild your reputation'.

Doing anything else will be seen as vindictiveness.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

"its unfair that his life will never be the same again as some ppl will still think he did it and he will have to live with that for the rest of his life but the girl/woman will be able to continue her life as if nothing had happened.i dont think thats fair and i would be speaking to my solicitor to see what my options are"

How do you know that she will live her life like nothing has happened....we have not heard her side now he has been found not guilty so it's clear from point of law that he is not guilty....as for her we don't know her mental state or anything like that to judge her on her actions...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum

Oooh are we getting together a lynch mob? I'll sort the torches if someone else wants to bring the pitchforks.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I don't think so....regardless if it is found out that she has lied which without evidence I cannot conclude it has...what is the point of dragging it all up again for a bit of dosh....he has been found not guilty is that not enough...he won the battle don't mean he has to win the whole bloody war..."

Sorry. Got to disagree with you there. She deserves everything that the guy is willing to throw at her. She destroyed his life for a bit of compo and fame so let her enjoy the INfamy that her false allegations has brought about.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Just saved me typing the same

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

I hope he adopts a dignified silence

and rebuilds his life and continues his career

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

".......i dont think thats fair and i would be speaking to my solicitor to see what my options are

A sensible solicitor will suggest 'keep your head down, go back to work and try to rebuild your reputation'.

Doing anything else will be seen as vindictiveness. "

and whats wrong with that she tried to get the bloke sent down for something he didn't do so hell yeh i'd want to see her suffer

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

How do we know they are false he has been found not guilty does not mean she fed a web of lies...I am sorry I don't know the full story from both parties to make such a swift judgement

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *RYBBWCouple
over a year ago

Leeds.

"If the lack of evidence is to be believed are the CPS not also responsible?"

The CPS are hungry for convictions for this kind of thing in light of the Saville scandal. Sadly in this kind of case, unlike robbery, burglary or murder, they can procede without any evidence against the defendant whatsoever. Just the words of the accuser are often sufficient to gain a conviction. That and the fact that there's no penalty to pay if you get caught out lying is strong motivation for the sick minded to invent tails of abuse to line their pockets as has happened here.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Some people on this site and the comments I've seen recently amaze me

I think she should be left alone to be honest.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *livia_KWoman
over a year ago

South London

[Removed by poster at 11/09/13 18:42:38]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

How do we know they are false he has been found not guilty does not mean she fed a web of lies...I am sorry I don't know the full story from both parties to make such a swift judgement "

Oh ffs. The guy was found NOT GUILTY! Meaning the jury didn't believe a word she said! The jury know both sides of the story and believed HIM!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

[Removed by poster at 11/09/13 18:41:35]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel sorry for anyone that has been wrongly accused of a crime & will always be remembered for "that" person and not the NOT GUILTY verdict regardless and if the forum users are an indication of the rest of the population - Judge, Jury and Executioner then god help society!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ce WingerMan
over a year ago

P.O. Box DE1 0NQ

If enough people sling enough mud, some of it will stick eventually.

Michael Le Vell has been proven innocent by a jury of his peers.

What's to stop someone else accusing another person of such a crime when they know that they can hide behind a shield and walk away without any repercussions when it all goes tits up for them

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"its unfair that his life will never be the same again

as some ppl will still think he did it and he will have to live with that for the rest of his life but the girl/woman will be able to continue her life as if nothing had happened.i dont think thats fair and i would be speaking to my solicitor to see what my options are"

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Agreed.

I was accused of stealing £600 of diesel by a former employer. I was called at home by the police who asked me to attend the police station to be arrested and inter_iewed. I went along, gave my statement which involved me telling them that I'd never owned a diesel and couldn't possibly get £600 worth of diesel in my vehicle even if I opened the sunroof and filled the cabin, there was also no footage of me at the filling station at any time.

I was still charged and it took a year to get to court. Where it was thrown out after 20 minutes.

I sued the arse off them and also told all their competitors about it.

The person who wrongly accused LeVelle deserves the punishment he would have got if he'd been found guilty...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hetalkingstoveMan
over a year ago

London

"Some people on this site and the comments I've seen recently amaze me

I think she should be left alone to be honest."

Absolutely. Its completely ignorant to think that just because the jury has said not guilty that it means the girl is an evil witch who was just out to get him.

Do those calling for retribution realise that not guilty is returned when the jury cannot be reasonably sure of guilt? The verdict does not at all say that the alleged victim was lying.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hetalkingstoveMan
over a year ago

London

"If enough people sling enough mud, some of it will stick eventually.

Michael Le Vell has been proven innocent by a jury of his peers.

What's to stop someone else accusing another person of such a crime when they know that they can hide behind a shield and walk away without any repercussions when it all goes tits up for them

It's already really hard to convict rapists. If victims know that they're going to prosecuted in turn if their lawyers fail to return a guilty verdict then we may as well give up. No rape victim will ever report.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *lentyoffun40Couple
over a year ago

Lancashire

All those calling for retribution haven't really Sussed the justice system

Yes it has its flaws

I do believe that people accused shouldn't be names and shamed until the trial is over

However just because he has been found not guilty doesn't mean the accuser is an utter bare faced liar either

Our system relies on evidence and it appears that there wasn't enough or indeed any

That's the system

What gives us or anyone the right to persecute someone who has made claims like these ?

For all we know there will be people out out there who have been found not guilty but are indeed that .. Same as there will be people out there who make accusations that are true but get called liars .. How damaging could that be ?

Yes improvements could be made but cut the judge jury and executioner nonsense

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

How do we know they are false he has been found not guilty does not mean she fed a web of lies...I am sorry I don't know the full story from both parties to make such a swift judgement

Oh ffs. The guy was found NOT GUILTY! Meaning the jury didn't believe a word she said! The jury know both sides of the story and believed HIM! "

Not guilty doesn't mean she was telling lies about the whole thing though does it, just that the jury had doubts about the guilt of they guy.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ok, fair point about the circumstances of him being found not guilty.

But, if he was PROVEN beyond doubt to be not guilty should his accuser then be charged? That would probably have been a better question to ask...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ce WingerMan
over a year ago

P.O. Box DE1 0NQ

"If enough people sling enough mud, some of it will stick eventually.

Michael Le Vell has been proven innocent by a jury of his peers.

What's to stop someone else accusing another person of such a crime when they know that they can hide behind a shield and walk away without any repercussions when it all goes tits up for them

My point is that his name has been slurred forever although proven innocent.

The girl in question just goes along with her normal daily life as if nothing had ever happened

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Or looking at it another way, the Jury didnt believe a word of the smarmy arsed prosecution lawyers spiel, which from what i can gather was more often than not mere supposition of what they believed the accused to be rather than any evidential fact.

Shouldn't they suffer something for their attempted deception?

ps Well done Jury members.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have little faith in the judicial system and have seen first hand people getting off with crimes because of lack of evidence.

I'm not for one minute saying he's guilty and I know a lot of people have faulsly accused which is disgusting.

But none of us were there so we can't judge her, we can't prove shes a money grabbing liar.

Imagine there's a small chance she was telling the truth and you all want her named and shamed after she's possibly already been through hell.

Leave her alone, its over.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

How do we know they are false he has been found not guilty does not mean she fed a web of lies...I am sorry I don't know the full story from both parties to make such a swift judgement

Oh ffs. The guy was found NOT GUILTY! Meaning the jury didn't believe a word she said! The jury know both sides of the story and believed HIM!

Not guilty doesn't mean she was telling lies about the whole thing though does it, just that the jury had doubts about the guilt of they guy."

But, as he HAS been found not guilty, shouldn't we at least give him the benefit of the doubt? Or should we still prosecute the poor guy by kangaroo court? I for one believe that he's had his day in court and won!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

How do we know they are false he has been found not guilty does not mean she fed a web of lies...I am sorry I don't know the full story from both parties to make such a swift judgement

Oh ffs. The guy was found NOT GUILTY! Meaning the jury didn't believe a word she said! The jury know both sides of the story and believed HIM!

Not guilty doesn't mean she was telling lies about the whole thing though does it, just that the jury had doubts about the guilt of they guy.

i'm confused.....if he has had his day how can you call for retribution?

who is still prosecuting him?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *exiSlutBabeWoman
over a year ago

Stoke

"If the lack of evidence is to be believed are the CPS not also responsible?"

Problem with high profile cases is that if you don't prosecute the media and others shout "cover up" and "money talks" with a celebrity, especially one who is innocent it is better for them to have their day in court.

We don't need to know her identity though for her to be prosecuted for the offences she has committed and the devastation she has brought upon an innocent man, no doubt there will always be an element of doubt from some over his future personal life and career.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ibanditMan
over a year ago

Liverpool

That all may well be the case, but I find it outrageous that all the news agencies are referring to him as an "actor". At the very least, it's generous.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Personally the CPS can and should prosecute her for 'malicious prosecution' The accuser is protected from being identified, the accused isn't. There is also that under constitutional law an accused has a right to face their accuser. I think being able to judge someones demeanor is key to their veracity. Innocent until proven guilty. So I once believed anyway.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

".......i dont think thats fair and i would be speaking to my solicitor to see what my options are

A sensible solicitor will suggest 'keep your head down, go back to work and try to rebuild your reputation'.

Doing anything else will be seen as vindictiveness. "

this and what View said..

move on..

wallowing in revenge and why me etc which are very negative emotions will only drag him down..

not something that anyone with an addictive side to their personality would benefit from..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *umpkinMan
over a year ago

near the sounds of the wimborne quarter jack!

Have any of you ever done jury service? I sat through 6 weeks of it on one case - "conspiricy to cheat and defraud" on 13 counts was the charge and it all counted on if we believed that the guy being tried, a finance broker, conspired with motor traders to get finance for cars for people who could not otherwise afford it or for cars that still had outstanding finance on. Much of the evidence was on paper although most of it was extrememly difficult to be able to make a clear cut descision on. Thankfully, one of the jurors was a director of a large local company and was able to explain better how some company`s legitimately work which was a huge help. One thing the judge emphasised time and time again during his summing up was that if there was any doubt we must find the accused NOT GUILTY. Indeed he directed us to find the defendant not guilty on one charge as the motor traders accused with him were killed in an accident on their way to court even though the evidence presented to us appeared pretty compelling.

We did find the defendant guilty on about 3/4 of the charges and he was sent to prison. He was in court for the same thing but with a different finance company about 9 months later and was found guilty again so it looks like we got it right!

Back to the original subject!

The charge of rape is a very difficult one to decifer in my opinion. All you need in court is a victim who may be overwhlmed by the experience and a very clever defence lawyer and what may have been a clear cut decision may just have developed into just enough doubt to find the defendant not guilty. Unfortunately the old saying of "there`s no smoke without fire" is not good enough to secure a conviction, however much gut feeling you have.

In this case there could even be some undetected metal illness on both sides that may come into play. Such a difficult case to be sure of the right result. And don`t forget we now have the double jepordy rule now which could make everyone go through the whole thing again!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Think the man should be left to get on with his life him and his family have surely been thru enough. As for his accuser karma will get her she don't forget.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *kywatcherMan
over a year ago

Southwick

"Personally the CPS can and should prosecute her for 'malicious prosecution' The accuser is protected from being identified, the accused isn't. There is also that under constitutional law an accused has a right to face their accuser. I think being able to judge someones demeanor is key to their veracity. Innocent until proven guilty. So I once believed anyway.

It's the CPS that brought the prosecution to court. They decide whether a case has a reasonable chance of conviction based on the evidence that the police obtain.

From what you are saying is that the CPS should now bring the CPS to court.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread