Bellamy cleared of all charges

[Guest spk]

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6157425.stm

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Craig Bellamy cleared of assaults

 

Craig Bellamy arriving at court during the trial

Wales and Liverpool footballer Craig Bellamy has been cleared of assaulting two women in a Cardiff nightclub.

The Cardiff-born 27-year-old was accused of assault against Sophie Palmer, 19, and her friend Holly Smith, 20, at the No 10 club in February.

 

The player was cleared by district judge John Charles after a five-day trial at Cardiff Magistrates Court.

 

His co-defendant, Franklin Lynch, 52, of Barry, was found not guilty of common assault against Ms Palmer.

 

More follows...

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Well chuffed for the lad! Hopefully he'll turn a corner now and start knocking them in for fun

[psl]

So get him in a car to Liverpool and out on the pitch tonight. He'll be flying!

[Guest Cameron]

Thank god justice has been served. Stupid drunken cows trying to get rich off Craig, THEY should be the ones jailed. Slags.

[Tosh]

Beat that!

[JohnnyH]

Knew he was a good lad who was just misunderstood.

 

In all honesty, from the outset this really seemed like a pathetic attempt for a bit of cash by the slags. Well happy for Craig. Hope he takes it out on a few defences (by scoring goals as opposed to strangling them)

[Stevie H]

hardly surprising when they have a welsh football legend presiding as judge is it?

[gkmacca]

Superb!

[Guest stevo96]

hardly surprising when they have a welsh football legend presiding as judge is it?

 

[Guest Cameron]

hardly surprising when they have a welsh football legend presiding as judge is it?

[gkmacca]

How dare you, sir! How dare you! Poor old Craig was always an innocent, short-necked man. Justice!!

[slapnuts]

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Well chuffed for the lad! Hopefully he'll turn a corner now and start knocking them in for fun

 

were crap on corners.

[McBain]

Thank god justice has been served. Stupid drunken cows trying to get rich off Craig, THEY should be the ones jailed. Slags.

 

Presiding at court everyday were you?

[Gomez]

During his closing speech on Wednesday, Mr Bellamy's defence counsel, John Charles Rees, accused Ms Palmer and Ms Smith of "devious manoeuvring" during their evidence.

 

He also said the prosecution's evidence was "confusing to say the least". Mr Rees told the judge: "We simply say that the evidence is a shambles as far as the prosecution is concerned and you should acquit Mr Bellamy of the charges."

 

 

These points were clear just from reading the court procedings on BBC over the last week, I understand that you can't punish these slappers like these who make jumped up accusations without having ramifications for real victims, but this should never have got to court. The Police have to take a large portion of blame here.

[R A Softlad]

Knew it. Well in Craig lad now concentrate on the footy.

[Guest Phil C]

...... The Police have to take a large portion of blame here.

 

 

Why?! They just gather the evidence, the decision to charge is down to CPS.

[Gomez]

Why?! They just gather the evidence, the decision to charge is down to CPS.

 

Yep, I was trying to think of their name, and they have their fair share of blame as well.

 

Still, I think it is up to the police to make the request.

 

If some drunken bird went to the police accusing you of 'clutching her wrist' do you think it would have gone to court?

 

I am pretty the police wouldn't waste everyone's time. They can't possible take every accussation to the CPS, they'd be swamped.

Edited November 29, 2006 by Gomez

[Guest Phil C]

Yep, I was trying to think of their name, and they have their fair share of blame as well.

 

Still, I think it is up to the police to make the request.

 

If some drunken bird went to the police accusing you of 'clutching her wrist' do you think it would have gone to court?

 

I am pretty the police wouldn't waste everyone's time. They can't possible take every accussation to the CPS, they'd be swamped.

 

That's precisely why they took this case to CPS for the decision, because it involved a high profile local football hero. Can you imagine the uproar if they just deafed out the women?!

 

No, the 'blame' lies solely with CPS who probably took the prudent view that they'll let a Court decide guilt - for the same reason.

[psl]

That's precisely why they took this case to CPS for the decision, because it involved a high profile local football hero. Can you imagine the uproar if they just deafed out the women?!

 

No, the 'blame' lies solely with CPS who probably took the prudent view that they'll let a Court decide guilt - for the same reason.

 

Let the court decide guilt? Who would you prefer they leave that decision to??

 

The police can make a decision to take no further action in a case or to offer a caution. Otherwise they refer the decision to the prosecution service who decide whether there is sufficient evidence to do so and whether a prosecution is in the public interest. From what I've heard about this case there was a 'victim' alleging assault and a witness to that assault. The CPS were always likely to authorise charge in that decision and put the evidence before a court. It is always for a court to decide guilt.

 

That's precisely why they took this case to CPS for the decision, because it involved a high profile local football hero. Can you imagine the uproar if they just deafed out the women?!

 

No, the 'blame' lies solely with CPS who probably took the prudent view that they'll let a Court decide guilt - for the same reason.

 

Let the court decide guilt? Who would you prefer they leave that decision to??

 

The police can make a decision to take no further action in a case or to offer a caution. Otherwise they refer the decision to the prosecution service who decide whether there is sufficient evidence to do so and whether a prosecution is in the public interest. From what I've heard about this case there was a 'victim' alleging assault and a witness to that assault. The CPS were always likely to authorise charge in that decision and put the evidence before a court. It is always for a court to decide guilt.

 

EDIT: Not quite sure why that posted twice!

Edited November 29, 2006 by psl

[Guest Phil C]

Let the court decide guilt? Who would you prefer they leave that decision to??

 

 

Not sure what point you're making,.....?

 

The police can only caution somebody if they admit their guilt. Bellamy obviously didn't. They referred it to the CPS, who decided that there was more than a 50% likelihood of proof of guilt. They were wrong.

 

The Justice system at work...marvellous to behold.

[Gomez]

That's precisely why they took this case to CPS for the decision, because it involved a high profile local football hero. Can you imagine the uproar if they just deafed out the women?!

 

No, the 'blame' lies solely with CPS who probably took the prudent view that they'll let a Court decide guilt - for the same reason.

 

So if any muppet makes an allegation against a celebrity, and gets one or two of their mates to back it up, that person has to be dragged through the courts at the expense of them and their employers?

 

You call that justice?

 

If this was you or I, it wouldn't have made it past the drunken accusations. Justice should be blind and the same procedure should be followed regardless who the accusations are against.

 

If the police would throw it out against your average man in the street, they should do the same for anyone, if there is an uproar, then so be it, if you are saying the police should base their actions due what might be in the s*n the following day, then that is a sad state of affairs.

 

Though as I said, the CPS are to blame as well. No doubt a lot of public money was wasted tending to the ego's of these two attentions seekers on the basis of sod all evidence.

[Guest Phil C]

So if any muppet makes an allegation against a celebrity, and gets one or two of their mates to back it up, that person has to be dragged through the courts at the expense of them and their employers?

 

You call that justice? No. its the Law - that's why we have Courts and Juries. Anyway, imagine the alternative e.g. you didn't prosecute because they were celebrities!.

 

If this was you or I, it wouldn't have made it past the drunken accusations. Believe me, you're 100% wrong

 

Justice should be blind and the same procedure should be followed regardless who the accusations are against. Agreed

 

If the police would throw it out against your average man in the street, they should do the same for anyone, if there is an uproar, then so be it, if you are saying the police should base their actions due what might be in the s*n the following day, then that is a sad state of affairs. The police cannot make the decision, the CPS does

 

Though as I said, the CPS are to blame as well. No doubt a lot of public money was wasted tending to the ego's of these two attentions seekers on the basis of sod all evidence. Agree with the sentiment

[Guest Portly]

Bellamy couldn't play tonight because - so they said - it would take too long for him to get back from Cardiff.

 

In the age of the helicopter and the executive jet??

 

In the circumstances, I would have thought it was worth spending a bit of money to get Bellamy up to Liverpool in time for the game.

[Gomez]

that's why we have Courts and Juries. Anyway, imagine the alternative e.g. you didn't prosecute because they were celebrities!.

 

That's not the alternative, the alternative is that when there is sod all evidence, the case does not go all the way to court. Remember, the judge said the evidence was shambolic. It should not have got to court.

 

 

Believe me, you're 100% wrong

I know you have experience in or with the police, but I know of cases, in Liverpool, where people have been assaulted (kicked and punch, but ultimately, no serious injury) in the street with several witnesses and the police have said it is not worth taking it any further, even though they knew who it was, and had people willing to go to court.

 

The police cannot make the decision, the CPS does

So if I was to accuse someone of a crime, regardless of any real evidence, the police have to ask the CPS whether to go court?

And they are most likely to agree because it is someone famous?

 

When to we play the chavs?

 

 

 

Bellamy couldn't play tonight because - so they said - it would take too long for him to get back from Cardiff.

 

In the age of the helicopter and the executive jet??

 

In the circumstances, I would have thought it was worth spending a bit of money to get Bellamy up to Liverpool in time for the game.

 

Bellamy couldn't play tonight because Rafa likes to plan his tactics and prepare his squad for a number of days before the match and Bellamy hasn't been here.

 

Sure he could have flown back, but he would not have been prepared to Rafa's standards.

[Guest Portly]

Bellamy couldn't play tonight because Rafa likes to plan his tactics and prepare his squad for a number of days before the match and Bellamy hasn't been here.

 

Sure he could have flown back, but he would not have been prepared to Rafa's standards.

 

Hmmm ... all this preparation didn't seem to have done the likes of Garcia and Pennant any good. They were awful. Even Kuyt looked ineffective. I would have preferred to try an unprepared Bellamy, he couldn't have been any worse.

[Guest Scot]

If it had been your daughter/sister/missus you'd have wanted the perpetrator prosecuted, whoever he was.

 

He's been cleared, but I'm not happy about the women getting bagged out.