To think this is an insane verdict

[DancingNotDrowning]

pilot who takes lost girl back to his hotel not guilty of kidnap and assault.

unbelievable verdict, poor girl.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly2xv1yx83o.amp

If this had been a builder not a pilot, the verdict would have been guilty. With or without evidence.

Because yet another paedophile has got off with no charge?

The girl said he gave a drink of water but it tasted bitter.
there is evidence she had been given it by someone
according to the girl nobody else was with her so it was either her parents, him, a police officer or a medical person at the hospital 🤨

I wonder if the whole jury found him not guilty or if one or two of them did. Is there any way of finding this out?

It almost makes you wonder whether the jury have been nobbled to be honest.

I just saw this and was about to start a thread! It really is insane. He took a 9 year old girl to his home for 2 hours. Prussak claimed to have taken the girl back to his flat because it had begun to rain and he wanted to find details online of emergency services. He said they eventually left the apartment to head to a fire station he had located. 99 fucking 9. Security at Harrods. He walked her past police at an embassy which is how she was found.

What the hell were that jury on? This needs to be retried.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/29/former-us-air-force-pilot-cleared-of-assaulting-nine-year-old-girl

The whole story is absolutely sickening.
I hope the parents demand a retrial.
interestingly this fellow was of ‘no fixed address’.
But like Huw Edwards, Eric Joyce etc etc he got off as the establishment have no problem with paedophilia

I don't think you can be as absolute as that. I could imagine, for instance, an acquaintance of mine doing something like this simply because he's really very "innocent", not bright and thinks in a very linear way, and he might go into a panic of thinking he had to help and that his flat nearby was a safe space in which to sort out how to do that, particularly if he was in another country. I realise that doesn't particularly square with someone who has been a pilot, but it might if he had been through trauma or had something in the nature of a minor stroke, or was in the early stages of dementia.

And then kept her in the flat for 2 hours without contacting anyone??? Were you a juror???

@GoldenPheasant when it comes to children I wouldn’t have thought kidnap or abduction required violence or to be sly. Kids are trusting and vulnerable and can easily be lured away, that’s why we teach them not to get into cars with strangers etc.

but it might if he had been through trauma or had something in the nature of a minor stroke, or was in the early stages of dementia

fucking dementia?! He doesn’t have dementia. He’s a pilot who was attending London for an interview. People really will make every excuse for men

Our legal system is very weighted towards the defendant. Having done jury service, I am now not suprised that the conviction rate in sexual assault cases is so low.
It was made very clear by the judge that we all had to be '99.9%' sure to return a result of guilty. Some of us were that sure, some were 'quite sure' 'nearly sure' but not 99.9% sure. In the end we returned a 'hung' verdict, which meant it went to retrial, and he was convicted as defendant had sprung new info in our trial that the prosecution had no chance to investigate, but 2nd time round he didn't have element of suprise, the prosecution were able to pull his defense apart.

It's really tough to be on a jury, I had nightmares for months after that we had let a child rapist go free (I was one of those convinced he was guilty)and was so relieved when I found out he had been convicted.

I was surprised when I read the verdict and like a pp also wonder whether it was unanimous or not.

He was found not guilty because there was no evidence he actually committed a crime, or that a crime had been committed at all.

Requiring non-circumstantial evidence in order to convict people of crimes is vital for a just society, even if it doesn't return the just verdict in every individual case.

Articulate, intelligent man keeps lost child in a hotel room for 2 hours and no crime was committed?

More details in this article https://nypost.com/2024/10/29/world-news/ex-air-force-pilot-robert-prussak-acquitted-of-kidnap-sex-assault-of-girl-in-london/

They cannot demand a retrial unless the first trial was found to be invalid through a legal fault, or if new evidence comes to light, or it was a hung jury.

the girl provided direct evidence from what I understand

she said he gave her bitter water and she was found to be drugged
she said he sexually assaulted her. This isn’t circumstantial evidence.

What was the testimony of the girl if not evidence?

How wonderful for society but devastating for vulnerable members of it, and how convenient for predators.

It's clear that he hot away with it due to the lack of forensic evidence. I'm so sad for the girl and her parents.
It's sickening to imply that the girl made up her accusations. She's 9 for God's sake! I don't know ow any child that would make up such things, certainly not at such young age

no one would have taken this girl back to their hotel ffs unless they wanted her in the hotel

Asking a child to follow you to a hotel room and being there is not actually a crime.

I get it. It's incredibly hard to fathom that he didn't have nefarious reasons for doing this. But juries are asked to decide whether there is sufficient evidence that a specific person committed a specific crime, not whether something "looks shady" or common sense or experience or gut feeling says they're guilty. And those stringent requirements for convicting someone and punishing them exist for very good reasons.

He found a child outside an open department store, full of staff. He took her away from there, away from people, to his room and kept her there for 2 hours. The girl was shown to have a drug in her system. She said he sexually assaulted her. What more does it take?

He’s very clearly guilty.

The parents must be completely devastated

So as long as you're not unlucky enough to be a victim, then you get to be one of the members of society who benefit from a 'just society'

This is why jungle justice exists - because rigid rule worship has overridden common sense in the legal system.