Crown court next week
Notifications OFF
My husband is in crown court next week for what should be a pre-trial hearing but they are also having a chat beforehand about possible sentencing if he changes his plea to guilty. I'm really not sure how I feel about this. His charges are communication with decoy and although I know he's guilty (he admitted it), but as someone else said earlier, it doesn't feel right that he feels the need to plead guilty. He sees it as better than wait 18 months for a trial where he will probably be found guilty anyway. His barrister has said he thinks it'll most likely be a suspended sentence but having seen some of the sentences on here, I'm not so confident. If it's not suspended or they don't give an indication, I think he'll stick to not guilty. In some ways, it'd be good to get it all sorted. It's all a bit quick though. He was only arrested in August, charged straight away. I'm terrified of it being in the paper. I have told a few people but not many. He could also lose his job if they find out. He is living elsewhere so it's not our home address on the paperwork fortunately and he has a fairly common name.
Hi Lou Lou,
just got to ask, why is he pleading not guilty if he has admitted he is guilty?
If the chat beforehand brings up solid evidence that he is guilty as well, he hasn't got a leg to stand on and would most probably get a a harsher sentence if found guilty at trial x
just got to ask, why is he pleading not guilty if he has admitted he is guilty?
If the chat beforehand brings up solid evidence that he is guilty as well, he hasn't got a leg to stand on and would most probably get a a harsher sentence if found guilty at trial x
Good question! It's that disparity between what the law says is illegal and what offenders think they've done. It took him a while to realise what he'd done was illegal. He initially was protesting his innocence as he had no intention of meeting but since the solicitor has had the evidence, he seems to have realised what he did was against the law. His hearing was initially supposed to be a month ago but it was postponed at the last minute for lack of court time. His solicitor called him the next day and they had the discussion about how long it would take to get to court and that changing his plea would get it out of the way. He admitted in his police interview that he'd been chatting online sexually, but he kept saying he knew everyone on there was fake and he'd been calling people out for being fake and he'd done this to one of the decoys - but he'd already had the chat with the decoys, so bit late for calling them out.
My person was going to trial. Although not the same scenario, my person admitted the chat but denied any intention to meet and that it was 'just' role play. He didn't feel he was guilty of the charge.
The CPS offered him a lesser charge but he'd have to plead guilty. He then went to a Goodyear hearing for a lesser charge. In this the judge was meant to give an indication of the sentence if he pleas guilty, my person could then decide whether to plead guilty or go to trial. He didn't but did say it would be less than if found guilty through trial of the original charge. He thought he'd have time to decide, in reality he had minutes maximum. He knew if he was found or plead guilty he'd be going to prison regardless - He decided to plead guilty to the lesser charge knowing the jury would very likely find him guilty. Have they mentioned that its a Goodyear hearing?
Similar to you, my person didn't see how the law saw the conversation and by taking the conversation on face value, he had committed the crime.
The CPS offered him a lesser charge but he'd have to plead guilty. He then went to a Goodyear hearing for a lesser charge. In this the judge was meant to give an indication of the sentence if he pleas guilty, my person could then decide whether to plead guilty or go to trial. He didn't but did say it would be less than if found guilty through trial of the original charge. He thought he'd have time to decide, in reality he had minutes maximum. He knew if he was found or plead guilty he'd be going to prison regardless - He decided to plead guilty to the lesser charge knowing the jury would very likely find him guilty. Have they mentioned that its a Goodyear hearing?
Similar to you, my person didn't see how the law saw the conversation and by taking the conversation on face value, he had committed the crime.
He hasn't mentioned that it is a goodyear hearing but I assume that's what it is. He says it's an informal chat before the other hearing but they've submitted a statement. I did try to prepare him for them not giving an opinion by asking what he'll do if they don't give an answer or it's not suspended, as I remember you saying before that they didn't give your person a definite answer. He seems to trust his barrister as he's defended lots of these cases before, so we'll see.
I'm away with my kids next week, so I can't even be there. Though in a way I'm glad as I'm not sure I want to hear the charges or any of the evidence. I've said it's too early to make a decision about our relationship but I think hearing those might push me further towards splitting up.
I'm away with my kids next week, so I can't even be there. Though in a way I'm glad as I'm not sure I want to hear the charges or any of the evidence. I've said it's too early to make a decision about our relationship but I think hearing those might push me further towards splitting up.
Thanks for explaining.
It's a tough one as 1. He didn't know 100% it was a decoy, 2, he can't prove he didn't mean what he said/had no intention to meet but 3, can they actually prove it that he did?
if he trusts barrister I'd be inclined to go with his advice. There was a couple of things I would not have done that ours suggested but we did and thankfully it paid off x
It's a tough one as 1. He didn't know 100% it was a decoy, 2, he can't prove he didn't mean what he said/had no intention to meet but 3, can they actually prove it that he did?
if he trusts barrister I'd be inclined to go with his advice. There was a couple of things I would not have done that ours suggested but we did and thankfully it paid off x
I don't think he stands a chance of being found not guilty and he obviously did do it. It still seems to feel as if he thinks he's innocent or been set up but this is the best option.
I'm so mad at him for doing something so stupid. I'm not very sympathetic at the moment, this has huge implications for us but I also want just want it to all go away. As I'm sure we all do.
I'm so mad at him for doing something so stupid. I'm not very sympathetic at the moment, this has huge implications for us but I also want just want it to all go away. As I'm sure we all do.
Loulou,
I totally get what you mean and many will argue about how anyone can go along with the conversation not believing they are really a "minor" but I do see how it's possible. I've been on chatrooms myself and although I've never been approached in capacities that we discuss on this forum I can confirm the internet is wild and everybody is pretending they are someone they aren't and living a life they aren't so I can see how people can go along with a chat thinking it's someone messing about on the other end and the fact people don't know the law around this makes it all the more possible.
Unfortunately, the law is as it is and the only way I think any possible way of arguing that the person did not reasonably believe the other person to be a minor would be within the conversation but I don't think many barristers are keen to argue this even when that context is available. For me, the biggest red flag in being a catfish would be the refusal to Facetime and not send pics (which decoys won't do) so I don't see how some of these cases can be considered as life-like situations. I'm only going off all of the stings I've seen online though. All the adverts we see about children being groomed online should follow information for adults around the law in my opinion and not just that but what the repurcussions can be if it happens to be a real child in terms of the harm they can cause.
I totally get what you mean and many will argue about how anyone can go along with the conversation not believing they are really a "minor" but I do see how it's possible. I've been on chatrooms myself and although I've never been approached in capacities that we discuss on this forum I can confirm the internet is wild and everybody is pretending they are someone they aren't and living a life they aren't so I can see how people can go along with a chat thinking it's someone messing about on the other end and the fact people don't know the law around this makes it all the more possible.
Unfortunately, the law is as it is and the only way I think any possible way of arguing that the person did not reasonably believe the other person to be a minor would be within the conversation but I don't think many barristers are keen to argue this even when that context is available. For me, the biggest red flag in being a catfish would be the refusal to Facetime and not send pics (which decoys won't do) so I don't see how some of these cases can be considered as life-like situations. I'm only going off all of the stings I've seen online though. All the adverts we see about children being groomed online should follow information for adults around the law in my opinion and not just that but what the repurcussions can be if it happens to be a real child in terms of the harm they can cause.
Honestly, I'd advise if he's guilty then plead it. It'll get the hell over with quicker, he'll have a reduced sentence for cooperation and it won't cost you so much, or be hanging over you for the next 18months.
Obviously if you're set with the not guilty plea, be prepared for it to drag on a long while and not end nicely anyway. If you've a good solicitor, trust what they say and suggest as they're your best help in this.
In my experience, though I'm no longer with my partner, about 2 weeks after sentencing and the media had reported it I actually began to feel calmer again. I could move on to the next stages of processing my life. I don't think I would have coped going another potential 18months in limbo land.
Obviously if you're set with the not guilty plea, be prepared for it to drag on a long while and not end nicely anyway. If you've a good solicitor, trust what they say and suggest as they're your best help in this.
In my experience, though I'm no longer with my partner, about 2 weeks after sentencing and the media had reported it I actually began to feel calmer again. I could move on to the next stages of processing my life. I don't think I would have coped going another potential 18months in limbo land.
BaffledB he said he wasn't asking for photos himself so this didn't come up as a red flag, though he did pick up on the language and use of certain phrases, and these made him think the person wasn't a minor. I think he was very naive.
Rhubarb, I know and I think i agree despite being conflicted about it. It's good to hear things have calmed down for you. Our next hurdle will be social services as we have teenagers. I'm not sure our relationship will survive this, he wants to come home but I'm not sure.
Rhubarb, I know and I think i agree despite being conflicted about it. It's good to hear things have calmed down for you. Our next hurdle will be social services as we have teenagers. I'm not sure our relationship will survive this, he wants to come home but I'm not sure.
If your worried of media I would suggest a name change Loulou it's worth a shot xx
Hi.
I've actually seen quite a lot of communication charges in my local paper recently and it seems a lot of people claim they didn't actually think the person was a minor, with this being used so commonly it's likely it won't be believed. Unfortunately majority of the time it seems defendants are usually still found guilty. If the decoy has mentioned on multiple occasions their age then it's very unlikely someone will be found not guilty. I would suggest if he is guilty that he does plead it. He will get a far harsher sentence if he takes it to trial and gets found guilty. Defendants will always get a certain percentage taken off a sentence when pleading guilty and this can be the difference between a suspended or custodial.
I've actually seen quite a lot of communication charges in my local paper recently and it seems a lot of people claim they didn't actually think the person was a minor, with this being used so commonly it's likely it won't be believed. Unfortunately majority of the time it seems defendants are usually still found guilty. If the decoy has mentioned on multiple occasions their age then it's very unlikely someone will be found not guilty. I would suggest if he is guilty that he does plead it. He will get a far harsher sentence if he takes it to trial and gets found guilty. Defendants will always get a certain percentage taken off a sentence when pleading guilty and this can be the difference between a suspended or custodial.
Post deleted