Charges and progress
Notifications OFF
Hi all,
Nearly a year after the knock and my person being arrested and released on bail, we have some charges today.
1) extreme pornography (1 video)
2) Catagory A IIOC (4 IMAGES)
Thats all.
Can I ask if anyone knows if this means he didn't have any other categories found?! Would they carry their own charge? Would they be stated? Or will I get told there's more categories at court or in evidence?!
There is hope out there that it might not take as long as you first thought. Our case is being dealt with by the NCA, not local police.
Thanks all.
Nearly a year after the knock and my person being arrested and released on bail, we have some charges today.
1) extreme pornography (1 video)
2) Catagory A IIOC (4 IMAGES)
Thats all.
Can I ask if anyone knows if this means he didn't have any other categories found?! Would they carry their own charge? Would they be stated? Or will I get told there's more categories at court or in evidence?!
There is hope out there that it might not take as long as you first thought. Our case is being dealt with by the NCA, not local police.
Thanks all.
And a first court appearance in three weeks. Wow. Wasn't expecting it that quick.
They would come under there own charge. Oh had 3 charges for a,b,c . So yeah that's all they found although they changed the number on oh from charges to sentencing so I don't know how they work it out
I was told that from their intelligence the police know what images are there. However not all these images are always recovered so the police can only charge on what they find.(this doesn't mean there's not more there just that they couldn't find them all)
Hi if that's what charges have been put forward to cps then that is all they have managed to recover from devices.
they mentioned in my partners sentencing that there will have been others but they were unable to retrieve
they mentioned in my partners sentencing that there will have been others but they were unable to retrieve
Jayjay,
That seems a bit naughty from them to make that statement! "There would have been others but they were unable to retrieve", things like that should be struck from court as it is effectively hearsay evidence and shouldn't be admissable when determining guilt or sentencing.
That seems a bit naughty from them to make that statement! "There would have been others but they were unable to retrieve", things like that should be struck from court as it is effectively hearsay evidence and shouldn't be admissable when determining guilt or sentencing.
It's like when they said they couldn't get into the phone because they turned it off and asked for the password 6 months later but they had laptop linked to the phone so could have reset the password from the laptop if they wanted to get into it but the guise of we couldn't get into it so there is likely to be more just couldn't access!!
its bulls*it they do what suits them what looks best for them in court! No one mentioned they found no other evidence to suggest he is a P word not even porn he's never been interested!
its bulls*it they do what suits them what looks best for them in court! No one mentioned they found no other evidence to suggest he is a P word not even porn he's never been interested!
Hi Baffled,
sorry I wasn't clear, wasn't read out in court, our solicitor told us beforehand that the police report said there were other images which were not retrievable. How would they know that -if they can't retrive them lol
sorry I wasn't clear, wasn't read out in court, our solicitor told us beforehand that the police report said there were other images which were not retrievable. How would they know that -if they can't retrive them lol
Ahh I see! It's so wrong the more people say about the police and parts of their evidence the more it becomes apparent they play dirty. As you said, how would they know there was more if it couldn't be retrieved?!