It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Flavian
I suspect this may have been research for a system that creates discreditable witness later used to sabotage cases.
Another former patient of Aston Hall, Sandra, thinks she may have been encouraged to develop false memories.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Mclaneinc
Its quite simple. The reason this needs looking into now, and every possible detail being bought to light, is so that the entire systemic disease that kept him out of jail can be broken down, its elements taken to jail, and to make it easier for other abusers in similar positions to be identified, removed from their comforts and placed in jail.
This is why the inquiry must proceed, and why the selfishness of his family must be brushed aside as a comparitive irrelevance for the moment.
originally posted by: Flavian
However, it has to be said that serious questions have (again) been raised about the credibility of the key witness into these investigations. The serious questions being that the witness has previously lied under oath about abuse allegations against a seperate individual / individuals.
This keeps happening with the historic investigations. The main witnesses often turn out to be fantasists who have previously lied under oath.
Because the charges are so serious, it still should really be investigated, in my opinion. However, fundamental questions also need asking as to why the CPS keep charging people based on the testimonies of proven liars and fantasists. This isn't giving Janner's family a get out - if guilty i hope his memory is foever tarnished. However, if it turns out to be based on false testimony then his accuser should face charges also as it makes it harder for other abuse victims to come forward.
I know 33 victims have come forward claiming Janner abused them - they can't all be lying. My point though is that the CPS still have a key witness who isn't credible and this keeps happening in historic abuse cases.
originally posted by: Flavian
[I just really struggle with historic enquiries. You want the "bad" guys to be caught but how do you know they actually are bad and it isn't vindictiveness. All the famous people being pulled in has led to a huge rise in similar claims against ordinary members of the public, often with no evidence whatsoever to back them up and from completely unreliable witnesses. Even if they subsequently get off, how do you then move forward? Mud sticks.
For example, my wife's friend has a cousin who has been accused and convicted of historic sexual abuse of another family member. The guy in question was charged by the CPS and found guilty by the jury and yet hardly anyone in the family believes a word of it, even after conviction. In fact, in court, they all stood up to tell the accuser she was full of s!*#.
This has completely ruined both her life and torn her family apart. At one stage, during interviews, she told Police that she wouldn't have come forward if she had realised he faced jail time (i know, how thick is she?).
Personally, i have no idea if he is guilty or not (allegedly repeatedly happened in a room with 3 people sleeping in and yet no one else can remember any of it happening). With such a paucity of evidence, how can he be found guilty?
We are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty but with historic abuse you are assumed guilty and have to prove your innocence - how can you do that for something that happened possibly decades before? I believe it sets a very dangerous legal precedence.
But, again, you then come back to the fact that victims need justice. Bloody difficult topic.
. . . he made a video called ‘Jasmine and the Morning Star’, featuring a 15 year old girl. Many of you voiced your concerns about the nature of the filming – it seemed perverted and almost paedophilic. You were right. Luckily, this girl’s mother was a bit wise to him, and accompanied the child to his flat in London, unexpected by him. He tried grooming her nevertheless, whispering to her that they had a special ‘connection’ and so on, but he could not make his sexual move in front of her mother. He had wanted her alone. He finally did get her alone, when the poor girl was only 16 years old. He got her very drunk, took her to his home, and slept with her despite her initial protests, and despite him apparently being in love with his ‘goddess’. Afterwards, the child went to the bathroom to be sick, and called a friend who luckily collected her. The story gets worse. The next day, she was very upset and told her mother. Her 40 year old mother confessed that she too, had been taken out by Charlie, and that he had also slept with her when she was too drunk to know what she was doing – just the night before he slept with her 16 year old child. Yes. I feel incredibly sick too.
He has today posted new videos that he has made with this child. The girl realises now that filming with him again was a mistake, and would like all footage of herself removed. He makes her feel uncomfortable and unsafe. She is aware of his dark, ulterior motives. It is not the first time Charlie has used children. When he was in his early 20s, he had a secret ‘relationship’ with a 14 year old schoolgirl.
Charlie was on a huge ego trip and was prepared to break young, innocent hearts along the way. He cheated with anyone he could get his hands on. He cheated on his ‘goddess’ at every festival he was stupidly given free tickets too – from ‘Sunrise’, to (ironically) ‘TruthJuice’, whilst his girlfriend was taking her university exams.
originally posted by: Flavian
Why would a victim put themsleves through it? Some people are just compulsive fantasists. Whilst this is only a small minority, the fact that people are put for trial based on fantasists evidence makes it all the more difficult for real abuse victims to get any justice.
Of the case i was speaking about, the 3 people in the bed were all young (under 16). It wasn't a trusted family member, it was a sibling. The accuser already had (even at the age the "abuse" happened) a long history of fantasy and outright lying.
The point i am really making is that it is just so hard to do anything historically. When there is no physical evidence, it leaves the entire system open to abuse. I have absolutely no doubts that some very guilty people are currently free because they know nothing can be pinned on them. Equally though, i have no doubts that some innocent people have been convicted on the back of nothing more that vindictiveness (as some legal appeal cases have already proven).
When it is such a muddle, how do you get any conclusive answers?