The Metropolitan Police has failed to find anyone whom Russell Brand might have assaulted even within the understanding of Harriet Harman's Sexual Offences Act 2003, so that it is with Harman that any problem with things like the rape conviction rate should be taken up. Indeed, when it comes to those featured in The Times (Murdoch, so effectively the Government of the day), in the Sunday Times (Murdoch), on Dispatches (the State), and then on Woman's Hour (the State), then there is no evidence that they exist at all. Prove me wrong.
So it is over to Thames Valley Police to do Brand for the harassment of a woman whom he had previously accused of harassment, apparently not understanding that that was precisely how it did not work. In theory, a man could be harassed by a woman. But, well, just try that one and see what happened. Or ask Brand about it.
And you cannot be acquitted of harassment. Two solicitors and a barrister have confirmed that to me, and I was told in writing that I would have no lawyer if I tried to plead not guilty. With no jury involved, the crime consists in having made the complainant feel harassed. If she says that she was, then she was, and the Magistrates will convict. They just will. That was literally the only evidence presented against Claudia Webbe, a sitting Member of Parliament. She was convicted, and her conviction was upheld on appeal. What matters is to be well enough connected that the Crown Prosecution Service will take up the case. The political hitjob against Brand continues.
Now the age of consent is too low for them, but Harman set it at 16 for everybody doing everything.
ReplyDeleteNow, now, you must never mention Harriet Harman and such matters.
Delete