Joanne Mjadzelics child abuse trial (title edited by MNHQ)

[MoanCollins]

Has anybody been following this?

www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/jury-begin-considering-verdicts-trial-8430814

Related to the horrible Ian Watkins case from 2013. Some really unpleasant stuff in there.

The verdict is probably due tomorrow. It seems like it's dependent on whether or not the jury believe she was doing it to trap him or if she was enthusiastically joining in and only reported when she got jealous he was abusing children with other women instead of her.

I'm not sure but tending towards the latter. She admitted possessing and sending all the images but later on said that she didn't remember sending them and hadn't searched for them. But if she had sent them (which she'd already admitted, but said she had a reason for) she must have found them somewhere and child porn images don't just spontaneously appear on your computer, you have to look for them. So she seems like a dishonest witness. And she was talking to him about raping and murdering babies, even if she wanted to catch him there was no reason to go that far and feed his fantasies.

The police are coming out of it very badly for not acting on her reports though.

I'm not sure this is was the right verdict.

She was encouraging him to abuse in order to trap him but doesn't that mean that potentially more children could have been abused by her actions?

Another case where some MNers assume that they somehow know more about the case than the full detail of the evidence put before a jury.

Sounds familiar.

I am going to reserve further judgment as I haven't properly researched this, and I do have a reasonable amount of faith in our judicial system.

But I cannot help having a horrid taste in my mouth about this.

cross posted with feenie, yes, I am very much seeing the point you are making and the possible comparison with another much-publicised case at present

so for that reason, I go with the jury

there is no other choice really

the whole thing is just utterly vile (like the other one)

Love that a court decides something but armchair lawyers on Mumsnet know better.

I've been involved in many many trials and hearings. Some of which are reported. Very rarely accurately and never with full knowledge of the facts that sentencers have

Agreed - just vile.

Very much so AF.

Nobody wins with these cases.

I don't know enough about this case to express an opinion on the verdict, but if it's true that she reported Watkins to the police at least twice, several years ago, and they did nothing, then that is absolutely shocking. Presumably the fact that she reported him was recorded by the police, and presumably they didn't challenge her in court on this, so it seems that the main effect of the prosecution has been to draw attention to police incompetence.

There are three separate investigations by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, apparently - and she went to them at least 5 times.