Quote:
Originally Posted by leviathon435
I see no problem at all here, a woman got angry and attacked a person abotu whom she knw nothing, certainly there was no evidence of a crime having been committed by that boy. So she has rightly been convicted and should think about her actions more carefully. A real problem British society has, along with some youth violence and anti-social behaviour, is the demonisation and criminalisation of any teenager, especially boys by the media and this is represented in the actions of local governments and local people. Most teenagers behave respectfully and well but stories like this disregard that and just take the easy road of attacking the teenagers and assuming this woman is right because her father was a WW2 pilot.
|
HI THERE LEVIATHON,
I read your post with interest & felt obliged to reply.
As many national newspapers around the world have covered this story, there seems to be a particular journal local to myself, that got the facts wrong. Some of the sites have picked up & commented on that original news report, of which they had to print a hasty retraction in the next days issue.
To set the record straight, i am the very person the article is about---Julie Lake.
It was not an un-known youth, it was a youth who had been seen with a gang over a period of two years causing problems to our war memorial. We & many many others have phoned the police for two years but never get there quick enough to catch them red handed.
Our village was being held to ransom (to coin a phase) by a gang of about 30 youths who have no regard for anyone or anything else. The war memorial has been systematically vandalised for 8 to 10 years without one single arrest for criminal damage. (The rest of the kids in this village are great).
The story first broke the national newspapers before i was actually arrested.
To protect themselves from civil law suits, the media always have to use words such as "Believed" or "thought". Our community now believes that it could be this style of reporting that gave the youth in question the excuse to claim mistaken identity, (Or blame his mate)
After the four day trial, in the judges full summery, he stated that from the evidence he had heard from all witnessess over four days, he was in no doubt that it was NOT mistaken identity & the youth caught in the act of criminal damage to the war memorial when he was caught red handed, was indeed, the youth i had always maintained.
I was found guilty however due to the way i behaved towards him & his mates.
It was also the reason the judge threw out all claims for compensation from the youths & did not award a penny to them.
Due to the judges summing up, he opened a can of worms by stating this as he left it wide open for anyone to now call for that youths arrest for criminal damage to the war memorial. This is already under way.
I hope you don't think i am having a go at you in particular, it is just some-thing we keep having to spell out due to errors in that one particular rag.
They have admited their mistake & apologised to me in writing, however, those who do not read all of the sites on this subject can be forgiven for taking as read what they read firstly.
I hope this clears things up anyway,
very best wishes,
AGENTFOXMULDER