I should be writing headlines for the Scotsman. But it's pretty unfair imo. http://tinyurl.com/yjcrt8q
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
First tacks now all charges dropped in Etape case
(17 posts)-
Posted 14 years ago #
-
HMMM
No doubt 'someone' thinks he's been punished enough -
"Mr Grosset, who is chairman of the Rannoch and Tummel Community Council, was among people targeted in an internet hate campaign after he was arrested."
Posted 14 years ago # -
I have sources who can confirm guilt. Well that certain parties and their wife were going on and on about tacks on the road every time you went round their house but then it all changed after the fact.
Posted 14 years ago # -
NOTE - I have deleted a couple of bits that seemed to be speculation too far.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Whatever happened to justice?
Posted 14 years ago # -
Herald article is even more entertaining.
"Mr Grosset, now 63, last night criticised the Crown for taking so long to drop the charges.
He said: “I’ve got to say the whole situation was horrifying. Spending two nights in Perth police station isn’t exactly great.
“I didn’t realise that the justice system could treat people like that.
“I never did it, and there was never a shred of evidence to suggest that I did, which makes me wonder why it took so long for it to eventually reach this point.
“The thing that needs to be considered is that, if I didn’t do it, someone else did, and they haven’t been caught.”
Posted 14 years ago # -
Note the if in the final quote, I thinks he protests too much...
Posted 14 years ago # -
Although the "I never did it" in the line before is unequivocal. I think the "if" is just a figure of speech to be honest...
The most annoying thing is that if he didn't do it then, he's absolutely right, the person who did has got away with it and we're unlikely to know the perpetrator.
All very fishy, yes, but innocent till proven guilty.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Ah, a true lawyers answer Anth...
Posted 14 years ago # -
Is that a bad thing? Is believing someone is guilty because we perceive him as having done 'us' a wrong any different from a motorist believing that all cyclists break the law?
Worthy of debate. We need to know all of the facts, of course, in order to determine whether he might be guilty or not. The evidence has not been made public, and really the only basis we have for even thinking he might be guilty is that he was initially charged by the police. Unless you subscribe to the theory of 'anyone who the police get hold of must be guilty of SOMETHING' then the benefit of the doubt has to be given to the person against whom there is no discernible proof.
It all comes down to one simple question: why do you 'think' he is guilty? (because without knowing the exact facts we cannot 'know', and people don't get convicted on the basis of seeming 'a little shifty' in their protestations).
Posted 14 years ago # -
Anth
Perhaps you could offer to help him with a case for wrongful arrest.
Clearly there is a difference between 'not enough evidence to convict' and "there was never a shred of evidence to suggest that I did".
Posted 14 years ago # -
If we want to get pedantic about it, if there "was never a shred of evidence" then there clearly was "not enough evidence to convict."
Posted 14 years ago # -
Er yes
So why the arrest
- unless there was SOME evidence?
Posted 14 years ago # -
Or some 'suspicion' which was later not backed up by evidence. Granted it needs to be reasonable suspicion, and we all know the police never get that wrong...
Posted 14 years ago # -
My source suggests the chap was going around before the event saying that he was going to tack the road. This would be why the police lifted him. But this does not mean that he did it (he may have just been talking about it - someone he mentioned it to may or may not have then spread the tacks. After the fact he was adamant in his denial and presumably there was no further evidence.
Posted 14 years ago # -
I was only teasing Anth, the principal of innocent till proven guilty, is a good thing. I was more referring to your professional back ground. All we really know at this stage is that someone did put tacks on the road. A trial would have been useful in determining if he was actually guilty, or was A N Other.
Posted 14 years ago # -
He didn't do it and has urged the police to find the perpetrator and his wife. Maybe the police/authorities think two nights in the cells is enough punishment guilty or not guilty.
Posted 14 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
