Anorak

Anorak | Liam Allan is a victim of a police policy to treat all accusers as ‘credible and true’

Liam Allan is a victim of a police policy to treat all accusers as ‘credible and true’

by | 16th, December 2017

Liam Allan, the poor sod falsely accused of rape and betrayed by the police, is “not an isolated incident”, says Angela Rafferty QC, chairwoman of the Criminal Bar Association. She also warns that the Crown Prosecution Service may be “unconsciously biased” towards people who report sex offences. In other words: if you claim you’ve been raped, you will be believed. You will be referred to as the “victim” by the PR-driven police and “survivor” by a venerating media.

The apogee of this police, political and media collusion, the creation of their self-serving agenda to form a moral force for good in the face of depraved and powerful criminals, thus keeping the plebs in thrall to the heroes protecting us from evil, can be seen in those instances of celebs being nicked for the cameras, as in the cases of comic Jim Davidson, who was pinched at Heathrow Airport as he flew in to the country, and the no less innocent Sir Cliff Richard, whose home was raided on live telly.

In the words of retired judge Sir Richard Henriques, in his review of the police’s Operation Midland into an alleged VIP paedophile ring operating out of Westminster, a policy that automatically believes the accuser “perverts our justice system”. Sir Richard cited a 2014 statement of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary which stated that “the presumption that a victim should always be believed should be institutionalised” – a monocular policy echoed in the police’s assertion that ‘Nick’, who claimed to know of the alleged ring and had seen it all, was “credible and true“.

 

 

Said Sir Richard:

“Since a complainant may or may not be telling the truth, the present policy causes those not telling the truth to be artificially believed and, thus, liars and fantasists and those genuinely mistaken are a given free run both unquestioned and unchallenged.”

Of course, you might have missed Sir Richard’s report, as Daniel Finklestein quipped in the Times:

Bad luck for the Metropolitan police that on the very day it published a report into its handling of celebrity sex-abuse claims, the Americans held an election that took up most of the media’s attention. How were the police to know that would happen, eh?

Had belief counted for all, Liam Allan could have been sent to prison for a crime that was never committed. But prosecuting counsel Jerry Hayes was someone involve in the trial who saw sense and saved the day. Thanks to him and lawyers on Mr Allan’s defence team, police produced a copy of the ‘victim’s messages that exonerated the accused.

“Police officers do not seem to understand their duties of disclosure,” Mr Hayes, told the Mail. ‘They have a statutory duty to look at everything – not just the bits that will help the prosecution. They should log all the material and then send it up to the CPS lawyer handling the case. That did not happen here. The first thing I knew about [these messages] was when we were halfway through the trial. The defence counsel asked if I was sure there was no digital download from the complainants’s phone. She said, ‘Are you sure there’s nothing there?’ I said I would check. I asked the officer if he had the disk of phone material.’Oh yes,’ he said. But he said it was clearly not disclosable, as some of it was very private. I asked him if there was anything on the disk which could undermine the prosecution case. ‘No,’ he said.”

The officer was wrong.

As the Times notes:

The woman who accused Liam Allan of rape told police that she hated sex, but hundreds of messages sent to friends during the preceding months detailed her obsession with the student and her love of sex.

The messages were downloaded by police from the woman’s telephone shortly after she was interviewed in January 2015. Police then stated there were no messages of interest to either the prosecution or Mr Allan’s lawyers.

A few examples of her messages are shared:

“Honestly I was just a mess and I was like I’m asking for one last chance to show you how much you mean to me.”

 “After the initial pain of the train getting into the tunnel it’s not that bad, after a while it’s alright and it’s fun . . . everyone knows I enjoy it but it still hurts me to this day but no pain no gain. It’s worth it.

“It’s always nice to be sexually assaulted without breaking the law. You clearly don’t love me because you keep revoking my sexual advances, have I got to drug you.”

Conflate sexual experimentation with abuse – is that what the police do? And if it is, does it reveal how they view the sexes: women as inherently weak and men as rapists-in-waiting? Is the police force obsessed with identity, unable to treat people as equal in the eyes of the law? And how does a lack of circumspection and open mindedness help actual victims of heinous abuse who do pluck up the courage to make an accusation?



Posted: 16th, December 2017 | In: Key Posts, News Comment (1) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink