Seems Unfair To Me

[sir.prize]

Arrested over 12 months ago (November 1, 2012), Freddie Starr has been bailed and re-bailed three times this year without charge. Today he was re-bailed again until February 2014.

As I said - seems unfair to me.

[andy-hughes]

Obviously the police are proceeding with enquiries, and those enquiries are sub judice.

It will all come out when he goes on trial - if it goes that far.

[Zacs-Master]

What, exactly, do you find unfair?

[LazyGun]

I would agree with you that the police abuse their powers with the use of extended and repeated bail requirements.

Neil Wallis, under investigation over the newspaper hacking allegations, was treated in much the same way and wrote a piece about it earlier this year;

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/28/britain-police-charge-without-bail

Quite shocking I think.

[sir.prize]

''Proceeding with enquiries''. Maybe. Wonder how many complaints would need more 12 months to investigate. Meanwhile he is still only allowed to have contact with his two young children when his wife is present. Hmmmmmm

[andy-hughes]

sir.prize - i am sure that the police are not in the business of putting themselves in the way of six or seven-figure compensation claims for not having followed proceedure, and indeed the law.

If they are following this path it is because they obviously feel it is appropriate, and legal, for reasons which we are not party to.

I don't believe the legal system does 'unfair'.

[Zacs-Master]

It is impossible to judge whether there is any unfairness involved in this until the verdict of the trial is known. I personally don't see what is unfair about being allowed your liberty with certain conditions, under the circumstances.

[sir.prize]

Zacs-Master - and which trial is that?

[pixie373]

I think it's probably as fair as it can be, while the verdict isn't known, while still protecting others.

[mushroom25]

//I don't believe the legal system does 'unfair'. //

really Andy?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10421578/Why-do-judges-in-our-family-courts-ignore-the-law.html

[sir.prize]

pixie - and what verdict are you talking about?

[Zacs-Master]

Fair point sir.prize. Only time will tell, as the saying goes.

[jno]

it does seem troubling. Some cases clearly take a long time to investigate - complicated fraud matters, for instance. It's not so easy to see why what are presumably allegations of sexual abuse should take more than a year, even if the alleged events happened a long time ago. What's likely to turn up that hasn't already done so?

[sir.prize]

precisely jno. One wonders how many complaints have been made against an individual. Surely 12 months is long enough to investigate - unless perhaps asuspect has run riot at a World WI Convention. But who knows how Plod works . . .

[jackthehat]

I'm sure that Freddie Starr will be touched by your obvious concern about him...

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1188320.html
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1237009.html
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1284493.html
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1286003.html

[sir.prize]

One side endures it whilst the other enjoys it.

Steve - that also sounds like us and those in Parliament.

[jno]

can't stand Freddie Starr myself, jack, but he's entitled to justice and I'm not certain he's getting it.

[pixie373]

Verdict? Of whether he is guilty of the allegations or not.

[jackthehat]

Me, either, jno.

Still, it's good to see that some ABers are determined that he should not slip from our minds...

[sir.prize]

jack - I've told you twice before so here for the third time - your comments mean little to me. More often they are justifiably ignored. Remember 'saying' you were using invisible font? Same thing still applies.