User talk:Chovain: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Shadowbot3 (talk | contribs) m Automated archival of 1 sections to User talk:Chovain/Archive 3 |
→Changes: new section |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|}<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-10 DoUnreplied-Yes Target-User talk:Chovain/Archive_3--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE--> |
|}<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-10 DoUnreplied-Yes Target-User talk:Chovain/Archive_3--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE--> |
||
{{archives}} |
{{archives}} |
||
== Changes == |
|||
Hi Chovain, |
|||
The change to the "false" Harassment Allegation title was made as it was a fundamental part of the defence from the beginning and it was stated in court when the case was dropped in Dec 2007 that the allegation was false. |
|||
As the CPS themselves said the complainant lacked credibility and they offered no evidence upon investigation (which is why the case was dropped), and they did not in court challenge the lawyers claim that the allegaion was "entirely false". It therefore seems reasonable to disassociate an allegation which may be genuine - to one that is false, repeatedly claimed to be false and is finally proved to a high degree to be false and the is also accepted to be false by the Prosecution. |
|||
Best |
|||
Revision as of 08:58, 21 February 2008
 | This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Changes
Hi Chovain,
The change to the "false" Harassment Allegation title was made as it was a fundamental part of the defence from the beginning and it was stated in court when the case was dropped in Dec 2007 that the allegation was false. As the CPS themselves said the complainant lacked credibility and they offered no evidence upon investigation (which is why the case was dropped), and they did not in court challenge the lawyers claim that the allegaion was "entirely false". It therefore seems reasonable to disassociate an allegation which may be genuine - to one that is false, repeatedly claimed to be false and is finally proved to a high degree to be false and the is also accepted to be false by the Prosecution.
Best