• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

JFK

Richard Holden: The horrifying tale of how I was baselessly charged with sexual assault – and what it says about the police and CPS

Recommended Posts

Absolutely fucking horrific. The poor bastard - link to the story on Conservativehome.

... so a case that had fuck all chance of prosecution, selective witness interviewing, no interviewing of witnesses that disproved the narrative (proof once again that if you believe the police engage in evidence gathering to investigate all possible outcomes ... dream on), CPS sheer vindictiveness. 

God knows how much waste of public resources, the sheer mental stress this guy went through 

... fuck all come back on the woman who made the false allegations - perjury, wasting public/police time and resources for one.

... I hope this guy sues the fuck out of police. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Home Secretary Sajid Javid was embarrassed last night after it emerged he was caught up in the failed prosecution of a Tory aide accused of sexual assault.

Mr Javid told a court that a Tory official told him that Richard Holden, former aide to ex-Defence Secretary Michael Fallon 'grabbed her backside bare flesh hard' – and that 'no one' saw it.

But in an extraordinary twist, the alleged victim's legal team urged the jury 'not to rely on' – in effect, ignore – Mr Javid's statement because it clashed with the account she gave to the court.

Very very strange :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

All from the delusions of this evil witch that all men are rapists.  She has finally gone but how was she ever appointed in the first place?

 

 

Her legacy will continue for decades. I suspect she appointed loads of people with similar mindsets as to herself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seem to be no lessons learedn; time an dtime again it happens.

This was the high profile one that everyone remembers.  Chris Jeffries, landlord of murdered Joanna Yates.  Was entirely innocent.

However he looked a bit odd so the police leaked his name to the press as a suspect and they slaughtered him.

Christopher-Jefferies-007.jpg?w=620&q=55

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jul/29/sun-daily-mirror-guilty-contempt

Searching for him does really show how dreadful the straggly hair and attempted combover made him look; this is him now.

Christopher-Jefferies.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

All from the delusions of this evil witch that all men are rapists.  She has finally gone but how was she ever appointed in the first place?

img.jpg

This fucking piece of 3rd wave feminism shitlib led the narrative and all victims should be believed batshit

43 minutes ago, The Masked Tulip said:

 

Her legacy will continue for decades. I suspect she appointed loads of people with similar mindsets as to herself.

The whole top echelons of the organisation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

There seem to be no lessons learedn; time an dtime again it happens.

This was the high profile one that everyone remembers.  Chris Jeffries, landlord of murdered Joanna Yates.  Was entirely innocent.

However he looked a bit odd so the police leaked his name to the press as a suspect and they slaughtered him.

Christopher-Jefferies-007.jpg?w=620&q=55

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jul/29/sun-daily-mirror-guilty-contempt

Searching for him does really show how dreadful the straggly hair and attempted combover made him look; this is him now.

Christopher-Jefferies.jpg

I hadn't heard of that case, but yes that's what I was getting at with my earlier post, I think you're at much larger risk of being a victim of this if you are not attractive, or even worse, look 'odd' or 'creepy'. It's another big kick in the balls for lowest 'status' males, a fate worse than mere incel-dom.

Don't think this fella's gonna have any accusations against him any time soon:

image.png.2ed67e7d5d9a3220bb16cb56aa222feb.png

Edited by JoeDavola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, firs thing learned from this is - Dont resign.

If your employee sacks you then you sue for contructed dismissal.

 

Thne he needs to go after the bitch who set him up.

Can you make  case for her colluding with the police.

 

The realisation that the police are a bunch of lazy, useless/currupt, ideological bagmen sems to be a surprise to the middle classes.

 

 

54 minutes ago, The Masked Tulip said:

Investigated for 15 months? Didn't some of those paedophiles with the 9 year sentences only spend slightly longer in jail?

Nope.

Case open for 15 months.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, spygirl said:

Well, firs thing learned from this is - Dont resign.

If your employee sacks you then you sue for contructed dismissal.

 

Thne he needs to go after the bitch who set him up.

Can you make  case for her colluding with the police.

 

The realisation that the police are a bunch of lazy, useless/currupt, ideological bagmen sems to be a surprise to the middle classes.

 

 

Nope.

Case open for 15 months.

 

Because they all watch "Lewis" and "Endeavour" and think that is a reflection of your average policeman!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

I hadn't heard of that case, but yes that's what I was getting at with my earlier post, I think you're at much larger risk of being a victim of this if you are not attractive, or even worse, look 'odd' or 'creepy'. It's another big kick in the balls for lowest 'status' males, a fate worse than mere incel-dom.

Don't think this fella's gonna have any accusations against him any time soon:

image.png.2ed67e7d5d9a3220bb16cb56aa222feb.png

I have a story which, if I can put it together in a post, may appear within the next few days. It just went to court last week so it's now concluded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeDavola said:

I hadn't heard of that case, but yes that's what I was getting at with my earlier post, I think you're at much larger risk of being a victim of this if you are not attractive, or even worse, look 'odd' or 'creepy'. It's another big kick in the balls for lowest 'status' males, a fate worse than mere incel-dom.

Don't think this fella's gonna have any accusations against him any time soon:

image.png.2ed67e7d5d9a3220bb16cb56aa222feb.png

Joe, stop taking creepy pictures of me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right so hang on, just let's get the important facts of this case straight:

1) the geezer worked for the Tories from 2005 until 2015

2) her remained a member and employee of the party while (Tory) Chris Grayling as justice secretary shredded the courts and CPS budget and slashed legal aid

3) he subsequently got fucked over by an incompetent justice system and legal aid cuts

...and you lot have sympathy for him? Have a word with yourselves 9_9 .

I would have great sympathy for literally anybody who wasn't a member of the party that caused this fuckup the whole time they were in the process of doing it, but this chap reaped what he sowed, and it serves him right. Now where did I put my tiny violin...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rave said:

Right so hang on, just let's get the important facts of this case straight:

1) the geezer worked for the Tories from 2005 until 2015

2) he remained a member and employee of the party while (Tory) Chris Grayling as justice secretary shredded the courts and CPS budget and slashed legal aid

That might explain why the knives were all out then.   Doesn't paint the police and CPS in a very favourable light if they actively hold grudges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I agree it paints all involved in a terrible light, and I'd certainly have no problem with whichever state employee (s) were involved in taking this case to trial (rather than canning it at the earliest opportunity) losing their jobs over it. But don't get suckered in to feeling sorry for this cunt. He must have known what Grayling was up to and chose to remain in the employ of his party. He has a fucking nerve expecting anyone to be sympathetic, TBH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rave said:

No, I agree it paints all involved in a terrible light, and I'd certainly have no problem with whichever state employee (s) were involved in taking this case to trial (rather than canning it at the earliest opportunity) losing their jobs over it. But don't get suckered in to feeling sorry for this cunt. He must have known what Grayling was up to and chose to remain in the employ of his party. He has a fucking nerve expecting anyone to be sympathetic, TBH.

¿Qué?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lipid said:

I've just read the article, and this part of the first paragraph of his account jumped out at me:

"Could I come into the station for an interview? I assumed there had been some mistake – I would pop down to the station, clear things up and carry on with my life."

When I read that, I shook my head.

This could be an almost verbatim copy of an example where people go wrong when dealing with the police as told by Professor James Duane in this lecture:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

I've read his book.  It's short, and it's terrifying.  I encourage everyone to read it:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1503933393

Admittedly, his viewpoint is from the United States judicial system, but I'm pretty sure his advice is useful in the UK as well.  
His book includes examples of truthful statements by innocent people being used to help convict them of crimes (it was subsequently proved) they did not commit.

To very briefly sum up what he says:

Do not go voluntarily to a police station.  Do not give a statement.  Do not let yourself be interviewed.

If you are subsequently arrested, only say these two things:

1 - When asked, confirm your identity.

2 - "Give me a laywer."   

Do not enter any discussion of why you want a lawyer.  If the police say one isn't currently available, or you don't need one, just keep repeating: "Give me a laywer."

Do not invoke your right to remain silent.

Do not enter any discussions.

Anything you say may be used against you, but nothing you say will be used for you.

Let the police build a case - do not give them any help.

(My apologies to anyone that is annoyed by my repeated posting of this material.  However, as nobody has mentioned it in this thread, I'm posting it again as it may prove useful to someone who is currently unaware of it.)

As per a recent thread also on here - it appears in the UK you don't even have to confirm your identity unless in certain circumstances.

The police specifically believing you were involved in a crime iirc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.