"Richard Miller" wrote in message
news:no1m6e9kSpHGFwN1@seasalter0.demon.co.uk...
> In message <587dkmF2f8mghU1@mid.individual.net>, C R Fishwick
> writes
>
> [Snip]
>
>>> There is no
>>> conceivable basis in law that the major could have been found not
>>> guilty.
>>> But I applaud the magistrates for giving him an absolute discharge. It
>>> is
>>> clearly a case that should not have been prosecuted in the first place,
>>> and the AD reflects that.
>>
>>
>>Your statements seem to contradict each other!
>
> Not at all.
>
>>First you state, it's clearly
>>assault, then suggest the case should not have been brought! You can't
>>have
>>it both ways!
>
> Of course I can.
Why? Either it's assualt or not!
>Are you claiming that every single breach of the
> criminal law, no matter how trivial, no matter how understandable in the
> circumstances, should always be prosecuted without exception? Unless you
> are claiming that, then you have to accept that there is nothing
> inconsistent in my statements.
And who has the God given right to judge whether someone is prosecuted?
Whether trivial or not? If a "crime" has been committed it's the evidence
that is paramount! Not somebodies whim:-(
>> Even the boy admitted making up the story!!!!
>
> No he didn't. He admitted embellishing it, but there was no dispute that
> the Major did assault him.
Embellishment to me means he was a liar. And probably is a scrout;-)
|