Former Lord Ahmed of Rotherham, trial halted or...

[TheQueef]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-56338380

Has anyone read this?
Does this mean that he doesn't have to have a retrial?

From reading this BBC report it seems he's going to walk?
Can anyone shed light?

Small bump.

Does this mean that he doesn't have to have a retrial?

The prosecution are appealing the decision, so it's not a definite yet. If the appeal fails (that is if the appeal court agree with the trial judge) then unless there is a further successful appeal to SCOTUK, there will be no trial.

The TL;DR is that the prosecution have fucked up big time. Which isn't that unusual. What is unusual is that they had a second chance and fucked that up too. Which even in England is a bit too much.

Given how carefully prosecutions are stacked against the defendant when it comes to shonky evidence, for a judge (of all people) to throw a case out based on it is some weapons-grade fuckups.

But no one will be sacked, if that's what you are worried about.

It's hard being a lawyer with this level of incompetence around.

Thanks Prof the BBC report is a bit sparse and the rest is legal nouse.
Very disappointed in this.
I know one of Mr Ahmed (and his band of brothers) alleged victims, he's been left with lifelong physical injury. He isn't involved in the trial but obviously wanted some justice.

Could this be blamed on SYP of would it be CPS at fault?

Could this be blamed on SYP of would it be CPS at fault?

As is well known, SYP don't need any help to make a pigs ear out of a silk purse. However in this case, the responsibility for evidence and disclosure is squarely CPS territory.

But as I said, don't worry - no one will be sacked.

They never are around here.
Kicking balls into the long grass is their bloody forte.

Thanks again for the explanations I like my rage to be focussed plenty of targets here.

@TheQueef

They never are around here. Kicking balls into the long grass is their bloody forte.

Thanks again for the explanations I like my rage to be focussed plenty of targets here.

It will be a long wait now before (really there should be an "if" preceding that) an inquiry finds what went wrong. Bearing in mind the actual summary bit has already been written using a grab bag of "regret", "lessons", "unfortunate", "changes in place".

You can't help but wonder if the same deliberate incompetence would have been deployed had the defendant had been Joe Bloggs ?