hardly. they investigated a reported crime, and presumably proceeded with CPS backing. she obvs had a lot more going on in her head than that. mountains of class As won't have helped. move on.
the whole thing is a total load of media confected nonsense
she clearly had bigger issues than the court case - she was at the end of her "productive" life in that line of work, apparently incapable of holding down a normal relationship and probably feeling weird about being nearly too old to have kids
the Met is supposed to protect people against domestic violence in a zero tolerance way - of course they don't want someone to get away with it just because they are a famous person
Didn't she allegedly smack someone in the head with a bedside lamp? I doubt anyone would be calling for a review if it was a bloke who did that and then topped himself.
DV procedure and policy changes all the time. It removes much of the discretion that used to be available so if it has been followed and CPS must have agreed to get it to charge doubt MET can be wholly responsible.
*Please note this is not my personal view on decision to charge.
Yes she was charged (convicted?) after allegedly (?) doing something pretty horrific
Can't see why Met is at fault for going for biggest crime possible - presumably we all agree this should be the case in alleged DV cases, female celeb perp or not
The point everyone is missing is the one laz makes that CPS didn’t want to charge but the police appealed that decision - the interesting thing would be to understand why that decision was made and how often that happens.
0
1
Tabloid media eats its own, as an article of faith.
0
3
hardly. they investigated a reported crime, and presumably proceeded with CPS backing. she obvs had a lot more going on in her head than that. mountains of class As won't have helped. move on.
0
2
The CPS recommended not to prosecute. The Met “appealed” it.
0
2
they are going to get another absolute flaying, and they’ll deserve it
1
1
the whole thing is a total load of media confected nonsense
she clearly had bigger issues than the court case - she was at the end of her "productive" life in that line of work, apparently incapable of holding down a normal relationship and probably feeling weird about being nearly too old to have kids
the Met is supposed to protect people against domestic violence in a zero tolerance way - of course they don't want someone to get away with it just because they are a famous person
0
2
Didn't she allegedly smack someone in the head with a bedside lamp? I doubt anyone would be calling for a review if it was a bloke who did that and then topped himself.
0
1
I very much don’t doubt it
0
1
yes a lot of violent criminals are also depressed/remorseful for the impact to their own lives
the victim was about 25 too
2
1
Is this like when the media literally killed Princess Di and reported that the murderer was Prince Philip?
2
2
She was charged with assault when ABH seemed like the appropriate level.
I suspect the Met pushed back against the CPS decision not even to charge given the risk of being seen to play favourites.
She was covered in his blood FFS.
0
2
**Sir Woke asking admins for a delete thread button**
0
2
Lol, top trolling
1
2
you can always rely on warren to have a shit opinion
0
1
While I do agree with Laz, a fresh investigation is surely a case of shutting the stable door.
0
0
DV procedure and policy changes all the time. It removes much of the discretion that used to be available so if it has been followed and CPS must have agreed to get it to charge doubt MET can be wholly responsible.
*Please note this is not my personal view on decision to charge.
0
1
Imagine the outcry if Dermot o leary hit his partner over the head with a lamp, causing bleeding and no charges were pressed. DV is DV.
0
1
Yes she was charged (convicted?) after allegedly (?) doing something pretty horrific
Can't see why Met is at fault for going for biggest crime possible - presumably we all agree this should be the case in alleged DV cases, female celeb perp or not
1
1
The point everyone is missing is the one laz makes that CPS didn’t want to charge but the police appealed that decision - the interesting thing would be to understand why that decision was made and how often that happens.
0
1
Actually happens a LOT. It's why Plod refers to them as the Criminal Protection Service.
Join the discussion