The question we have to ask ourselves is whether justice is being done? The answer I would come up with is no!
There are so many areas of concern.
Roy was accused by an anonymous woman of sexual offenses that occurred when she was as young as twelve. She is now in her fifties, remains anonymous and has precipitated a catastrophe for Roy. It has taken forty years for this to come out.
a. It seems to me that this is something that could happen to anyone – particularly those in the public eye. Anyone could maliciously report a fictitious incident and all hell would break loose.
b. The period of forty years needs examining. Is it time to institute a statute of limitations on certain crimes?
c. Anonymity is a big issue. It must have been hard for the woman but she remains anonymous. For Roy it has been worse than any nightmare imaginable. His life has been wrecked. It has bankrupt him with no hope of redress. It has robbed him of income, reputation, recognition and an award winning end to his career. It has destroyed his health. The police put it out in order to attract in other ‘victims’ but in so doing they bring down a furore on the person charged. Isn’t the human factor the most important? Shouldn’t they both have anonymity or neither of them?
d. The fact that it did not bring forward a series of other ‘victims’ suggests, as we who know him already are aware of, that Roy is not a paedophile. Why was it pursued?
e. The two and a half year wait to come to trial is worse than a jail sentence. Heaven knows what it does to people incarcerated on remand for years? Surely things need to happen faster than this? You cannot put innocent people under this duress for so long. It is not justice.
f. Why, time after time, do we find the Crown Prosecution not throwing these cases out? Surely they need a higher level of evidence before putting someone through this type of ordeal? They need to scrutinise the evidence more thoroughly.
g. I, like many others who have gone through jury service, have lost my faith in juries. It seems to have become a lottery. Repeatedly I hear of stupid jurors who do not listen, do not understand, inflict their prejudice one way or another or have vested interests. Is it not time for us to look at a better system? Perhaps a professional jury, properly trained to assess and judge?
h. The whole process is steeped in nineteenth century trappings. It takes far too long, is inefficient and unprofessional. It needs bringing into the 21st century.
I do not believe Roy has, will or could receive justice. I am not sure about his accuser at all. If she is a victim, which I personally do not believe, then the system has let her down too.
There are no winners in this apart from the solicitors, barristers and judges. They get paid handsomely.
Justice is not what courts are about. They are about the law and procedure. We need justice.
Other, I concur wholeheartedly. I am reasonably well versed in the criminal system, and have also acted as a nurse. The simplest of issues can make or break a case, and the jury system relies on recognising what is pertinent, and what removes or sustains reasonable doubt. A Judge should impart that knowledge to their Jury. If they do not, then miscarriages take place, or are at least risked. The greatest worry is the time trials take to convene and to be heard. It is shameful that any trial should take more than 12 months to be heard, and delays are not in antibodies interest. Moreover, the cost of a case is often obscene beyond the public interest of prosecution. Add to that a system th a t allows 40 years to be acceptable for disclosure and you have a mockery. The only thing i will say is that anonymity for rape victims has been seen as necessary to promote confidence in true victims to report, but it has been seen to protect some people whose cases undermine and disrespect true victims of rape. It appears the majority of BriTish populace have either lost faith in the criminal justice system or are happy to be fed salacious nonsense by the gutter press. Oh dear.
I largely agree with all you say, but need to nitpick a little. By their very nature, victims of sexual abuse often have mental health issues. I don’t for one second doubt that the women involved were victims of sexual abuse. Part of the treatment for such cases in days gone by was Electric Shock therapy, which can often leave the patients with screwed up memories. It wouldnt surprise me if that was the case here. So no matter how it may appear, I doubt that the accusations were brought maliciously.
This was not the case with the charge that got dropped, where the defence was able to track down the Social Worker involved and whose testimony blew her story out of the water.
In the case of the other 2 women in the ongoing trial, I believe that records had been lost and useful witnesses who could corroborate or refute their stories were not available. This was the basis of Roy’s defence team’s move to drop the charges at the start of the trial. I didn’t understand the legal arguments the Judge put forward for continuing, but he evidently gave it a lot of thought.
It is a difficult balancing act between justice for any potential victim and justice for the person accused. I think it needs looking at.
Yes I agree Opher
The British legal system is not perfect but I don’t believe it is unjust. There are relatively few miscarriages of justice and often they are exposed sometimes years later. Usually the miscarriage occurs because evidence has been fabricated either by the complainant or by the police. “Verballing” used to be a common way used by the police to secure convictions. That largely disappeared with the introduction of taped interviews but there is nothing to stop the police planting evidence or misrepresenting the truth of an incident. I agree with your criticism of the legal profession, Opher,. Most of them are more concerned with the size of their fees than with dealing with the case in an efficient manner. The British legal system is an accusatorial system whereby two sides battle it out in a court room seeking a result in their favour. I have always preferred the French system where a judicial figure is appointed to conduct an initial enquiry into the complaint before any trial is allowed. Justice is not a quality available only to the defendant. It is there for the complainant also. It is a fine balancing act controlled by the judge, who is an experienced salaried lawyer paid annually not in fees.
I like what I know of the French system (mainly from watching Spiral). What I am saying is that it is in great need of an overhaul. I’m sure it can be updated and made to work much more speedily and fairly.
Hi Opher,
I’ve known Roy since the mid ’80s and considered him a friend. Spent a few nights in Folkingham and even hitched to Norway in January to see him (bloody madness). This whole debacle and the fallout has really saddened me. As someone who knows Roy much, much better than me, I would like to run an idea past you before taking it any further. Please drop me an email and I will reply ASAP (I’m in Oz). Cheers, Clive
Hi Clive,
I don’t have your email address!
Cheers Opher
Well, the CPS had 2 weeks to decide whether to go for a retrial on the Roy Harper case. Their time is up tomorrow. Roy’s defence team successfully and comprehensively dismantled all of the more serious charges against him. The charges that remain unproved and subject to retrial relate to just one complainant, whose major allegation was discredited.
Time to end this farce and own and up that the CPS got it badly wrong.
Meanwhile, a national treasure has been dragged through the mire, and what could have been a hugely successful late burst of his creative genius, the magnificent ‘Man and Myth’ album got stopped its tracks.
But hey, one of the UK’s most intelligent and consistent voices of dissent has been effectively silenced and left bankrupt with no chance of redress. Which was perhaps the intention all along.
Fingers crossed!!! Tomorrow is the day of reckoning. Thanks for your comments Ian.