jail hell after false rape charge
My jail hell after false rape charge
Jan 19 2006
by Luke Traynor, Liverpool Echo
A MAN jailed for five years for raping a 15-year-old girl has spoken of his prison hell after a judge quashed his conviction.
Jason Gabbana walked free from the court of appeal in London after revelations that police failed to disclose the teenager had earlier made a false allegation about a sex attack.
Mr Gabbana, 23, originally from Tuebrook, says his time in jail has left him emotionally scarred, and he is considering legal action against the police.
Mr Gabbana, who has been locked up for 30 months in Altcourse, Risley and Wymott prisons, saw horrific sights including scalding water thrown into men's faces, and inmates slashed with knives.
The former part-time model and actor said today: "I'm pleased justice has been done, and I'm trying to pick up the pieces of my life."
Mr Gabbana was released after it was discovered that the prosecution had not informed the defence his alleged victim had previously accused a man of harrassing her and committing an act of gross indecency.
Mr Gabbana says he first met the teenager in 2003 when he went into a branch of the NatWest bank where she was on work experience.
He said the 15-year-old bombarded him with texts, some of a sexual nature, but he has always denied raping her.
"Being in prison was a horrible experience, as a sex offender is the least popular inmate.
"I always had to stay on my toes to stay out of trouble.
"I've cleared my name and I want people to have no doubts I was wrongly convicted."
A Merseyside police spokesman said: "We note the decision of the appeal court and comments by the judge with regards to the need to remind officers of their duty of disclosure.
"We also acknowledge the belief that this was a simple oversight and not done maliciously.
"An internal investigation has been launched to ensure that any lessons can be learnt from this incident.
"It would therefore be inappropriate for us to comment further at this time."
Dude, stories such as this one...
We also acknowledge the belief that this was a simple oversight and not done maliciously.
Mr Gabbana, 23, originally from Tuebrook, says his time in jail has left him emotionally scarred, and he is considering legal action against the police.S E R V I C E W I T H A S M I L E
Just found this site ,I intent to be an active member .
It looks superb , well done to all behind it !
Isn't it about time that any woman making false rape accusations was sentenced to double what the "offender" would get ?
Rape is ,without doubt an evil crime , every false accusation makes it more difficult for a genuine offender to get justice .
Such a law , would protect women as well as men !
9th-February-2006 #6Quote from sealion
1) Those accused of rape should be anonymous until found guilty (though has a downside that other victims would recognise their assailant and come forward)
2) A womans sexual history should not be relevant or used as evidence against her (this is not to be confused with the case above - previous accusations are not sexual behaviour).
3) If a woman is found guilty of false accusation she should be punished and named. (This scenario is not to be confused with the case where the accused is found innocent - since rape is diffcult to prove. It would deter victims from coming forward).
9th-February-2006 #7Quote from BalancedHuman
The affects on the man are enormous.
Quote from BalancedHuman
Quote from BalancedHuman
Quote from BalancedHuman
Well, I disagree!
With regard to cross-examination, do not kid yourselves that lawyers are all like Perry Mason. They have often only read brief details about their cases on the way to work. It is almost impossible for them to cross-examine accusers properly compared to the defendants because they were not there!
And, further, an important principle of any decent system of justice is that accusers are made to face those whom they have accused so that they can be interrogated by them in front of some judicial body.www.angryharry.com - the only website in the entire world with the aforementioned domain address!
10th-February-2006 #9Quote from Anonymous
This allows the accuseD to speak with no means of intimidating anyone.
And yes, it should work both ways. This way everyone is safe, everyone can say their peice and everyone can get their defense heard!
10th-February-2006 #10Established Member
- Member Since
- Dec 2005
Ok I dont know about the UK but in the US you have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to confront your accuser in a court of law......Unless your accused of rape.
I dont know about the UK but in the US you have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to confront your accuser in a court of law......Unless your accused of rape.
Furthermore, if - as should be the case - the defendant is presumed to be innocent until proved otherwise, then he should be treated as such.
And this means that the accuser should be required to respond to questions put directly from the person who has been accused.
if the accuseR wants to be sheilded then they can put the accuseR in a secure room, black him/her out, disguise his/her voice
This is exactly what the Nazis and the communists did.
The accusers were permitted to hide away in the dark.
When an accuser can hide in the dark it is much easier to lie and to exaggerate and it is much more difficult for a jury to assess the truth. For example, if you were going to tell a terrible lie about someone with whom you were having some kind of relationship, then how much easier it would be to do this while being able to hide from them.
The "confrontation" clause of the Amendment VI ensures, generally speaking, that "testimony" will never be admitted as evidence against a criminal defendant unless that testifier is physically present and testifying in the presence of the accused, face to face, and thus subject to be cross-examination.
http://www.record-eagle.com/edits/kn...ts/23sixth.htmwww.angryharry.com - the only website in the entire world with the aforementioned domain address!