+xThis was a headline in one of the papers, following the tragic suicide of Caroline Flack. It's the first time I can remember, that the tabloids have been on the side of the offender, not the CPS.
What explains this sudden change of heart, I wonder? Is it that, in the tabloids neanderthal view of criminal justice, domestic violence still doesn't count as a 'real' crime? Could it be that the increased focus on mental health these days has made them aware of the reality; that anyone accused of a crime will suffer devastating and long lasting damage to their mental health, particularly if they have had no previous contact with the law before?
Maybe, it is just a case of one rule for celebrity offenders and a different rule for everybody else? Or, perhaps it is just a cynical ploy to distract public attention away from the media's own role in her death? To make the CPS the scapegoat, when it's the papers themselves who have blood on their hands. What do people think?
Hi
I have been thinking the same since she unfortunately took her life at the weekend.
Note I have no time for shows like love island etc so my words are not as a supporter of her as a viewer but more at the sad loss of a life due to actions of the media and society.
CPS:
I also believe the CPS were acting correctly as this was an accusation of domestic abuse; which if the abuse was against a woman, it would of received more media coverage preciously. I also agree they could not drop it just because the victim said there was none; there must of been evidence of some sort. Again if it had been a man against a woman and she said drop the charge, they would of said he was controlling her and been outrage if it had been dropped.
We will never know the truth so please everyone, she must be left to rest in peace.
Media:
I have always said if you believe what is said in the Sun then you have to believe what they write/wrote about you and your offence.
As an ex-offender (SO), and when the so righteous Sun writes about SO's I remember some reports they wrote which showed the real nature of this waste of pulp.
1) In previous days a 16 yr old could be photographed topless legally by the press. The good old Sun actually did a countdown of her last days as a 15 yr old to maximise publicity for when she appeared topless on her 16th birthday.
2) In circa 2011 - 12 The Sun published a report about a priest with a hidden camera taking voyeur photos of females and the words they used about were .......... Then when you turned the page they had a large photo of a model on a beach, wrapped in a beach towel trying to change her "pants", not part of a "photoshoot". The words they used were aimed to sexulise the image.
What is the difference between the 2 scenarios I ask?
Finally in late 2014 an elderly gent (grandfather), clicked on an email link and an illegal image appeared. He showed his wife and both contacted the Police immediately.
The next reactions are arguably a demonstration of bad management by the CPS, Social Services and media.
This is because the Police took the computer, informed Social Services who placed an order preventing him from seeing children, and the media reported in their normal style. Basically his life and his families, was destroyed.
After 6 months with nothing from the Police he took his own life because of the reaction and accusations surrounding him causing so much shame and anguish.
When reported on the Police/CPS only said there was not going to be any charges against him and he should of been told. The Sun only wrote a very small column hidden within the latter pages about his death.
I suppose it is unfortunate that in this modern civilised society we have to accept that as an ex-offender: especially a sex offender - any understanding of the stresses, both emotionally and mentally are not recognised. There is no appreciation that the family of the offender suffers greatly by the media reporting and societies reaction by suggesting guilty by association.
As in this case shows, it doesn't matter if the charges are proved, by publishing offenders personal details does have consequences that cannot be reversed.
In the end if all us ex-offenders - or family members - decided we had only one option left, would there be headline reporting and outcry against the CPS etc. Pointless me providing an answer.
Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------
This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.