Sam Kerr court case

Probably not helped by the victim not mentioning at the time or in his first statement that her comments had an impact on him.

 

Why wasn't the fact that it had had an impact on him included in his first version of his statement then when the first decision was not to prosecute? It wasn't included until second time round when it was reassessed, so basically a second bite at the cherry after amending statements to get a different result. Obviously that didn't go down well with the jury

 

I see the narrative of a two tier justice system is being pushed out by the usual people on twitter when this case proceeded by the CPS and reached court only got the jury to be the ones to not convict.

Based on what has been said by the judge, he was fully ready to prosecute and sentence her.

After the verdict, Judge Peter Lodder KC said: "I take the view her own behaviour contributed significantly to the bringing of this allegation.
"I don't go behind the jury's verdict but that has a significant bearing on the question of costs."

 

I think what he was saying was that the CPS were within there rights to charge her and have done nothing wrong so she has no standing to ask for costs. They already prosecuted her, so there was no need for him to do so

 

The issue is the crime she was charged with was racial harrassment so they had to show that she had harrassed him rather than just said the words. If he had said originally that the words had had some impact on him then maybe the harrassment would have stood up more but the fact that it took over 12 months, and to be asked to re write and rephrase his statement due to failure to get a charging decision, for him to realise that what she said had had any impact on him probably didn't help

 

The justice system ran it's course on this one.

She was arrested, she was charged, she pleaded not guilty, she had a trial and a jury found her not guilty on the evidence put before them.

No doubt a top lawyer and barrister muddied the waters enough to remove reasonable doubt.

Two tier justice would mean this never coming to trial, it is impossible to second guess what a jury are going to do but for those who plead not guilty to various things from the August riots, this is the kind of reason you should be pleading not guilty (and the statue into the river in Bristol) because getting it through a court even with video evidence isn't enough if an actual motive can't be found.

We don't have trial by social media but the same goons crying foul here, some even defend Lucy Letby ffs.

 

I could accept that if he hadn't complained at all. It is the fact that he has changed his statement for the second time round and added extra things to it for the second attempt to get charges pressed. The fact that the defence then have access toboth sets of statements was never going to look good.

 

the point is he did report it and made statements. A decision was made that there wasn’t enough evidence to proceed. He then rewrote his statements and it was put back in and reassessed.
As I said if he hadn’t have complained at all to start with I could accept your argument that he initially didn’t want to report it, but he did report it as racism straight away.