Caroline Flack and CPS criticism

[whatnow40]

Posting here as I haven't seen anyone else really question this. The CPS are being criticised for pursuing a prosecution, even though the alleged victim said he didn't support it and did not want to prosecute.

Am I wrong in thinking it's not up to the victim? And the CPS should be supported in pursuing a prosecution for domestic violence where there is enough evidence to not need a victims statement? Is there a policy on this? I just think that if this was alleged male on female violence, more questions would be asked about this aspect.

Yes she was scared of the consequences, and so she should be. Yes it's tragic she took her own life, rather than go through a trial that would allow her to defend herself, or reveal truths she wanted hidden. But shouldn't we remember someone for the entirety of their actions?

This very issue is being discussed on Woman's Hour right now.

Sorry OP but why not put this on one of the other Caroline threads? Poring over every aspect of this poor woman's life just seems repellant at the moment.

A victim of domestic abuse is very unlikely to press charges. I think it’s exactly that reason why CPS can continue with a case they believe has merit. I believe they believe they are ultimately acting in the best interests of the victim. I imagine this is why she was banned from contacting him also. Although I do wonder in cases of extreme violence how they prevent the abusive partner from breaching this.

I’ve been thinking the same about the CPS - her management teams statements in particular are unjustified. We don’t as far as I’m aware have a system where victims can choose not to press charges - seems an American TV series concept.

It’s really sad she killed her self but the CPS isn’t responsible.

I agree it shouldn’t be up to the victim. If it were, the pressure to retract the charges would put the victim in a very vulnerable situation.

@Languishingfemale, it’s not about CF herself, it’s about the principle in law. I’m sure no one wants to speculate on CF’s circumstances, that would be inappropriate and unhelpful.

@Languishingfemale - I think this has broader importance. A public body is being criticised for doing its job and there’s little critical thinking by any tabloids about it.

I think the CPS should have the power to pursue a prosecution for domestic violence where there is enough evidence to not need a victims statement. This has been the policy for a number of years now for understandable reasons.

I don't know if there was an element of the CPS being intoxicated by a celeb case. Apparently the charge she was facing was about as low as it could have been on the scale of domestic violence.

But I do know that many people are making hay with this tragic case to suit their own agenda.

lots of offenders commit suicide during an investigation- it's very common in child sex offences and domestic violence, i can't believe the cps is being criticised for this

Fair points. I just feel that we're continuing to do to her in death what happened to her in life.

Joan Smith on Woman’s Hour right now explaining.

The point is that we must treat domestic violence as the huge problem it is.

I think the CPS question is a fair one to raise. Many DV victims (usually women) drop charges out of fear and other complex reasons so if the CPS had evidence of serious assault they were right to proceed. I wouldn't wish that to change just because in this instance the sexes were reversed.

Thanks for the responses, and yes I meant this question to be in a wider context than just the CF case. I'm glad it's policy to pursue the case regardless of victim statement, and I believe it really is in the public interest to do so. I shall have a listen to Women's Hour.

I only started this thread because I had not yet seen or heard this question being asked, and am quite frankly disturbed by the criticism of the CPS over this.

I think you are right to post here. I think Caroline Flack's death is a feminist issue. But I do believe that the press have seized on this accusation, first made by an (understandably) distressed management company, in order to distract attention from their own culpability. Flack's fear, if those close to her are believed, was of public humiliation. It was not an irrational fear.

Women in the public eye are held to impossible standards by the media, and when things go wrong, that same media descend like vultures. The same people who pilloried Caroline Flack over her recent troubles are now reporting, with no discernable regret or sadness, on her "tragedy". The Sun had to quickly delete an unbearably cruel Valentine's card "joke" on the day she died. Now, the media are picking over what is left, with articles about every aspect of her life, and truly prurient attempts to make a case for blaming anyone other than themselves for the predicament she found herself in.

I don't know if she was guilty or not. The events of that night may have been domestic abuse, or just a drunken row. What I do know, is that in the days leading up to her death she was tormented. So much so that she felt she had no reason to continue living. That should give us all pause for thought.

Yes I agree OP - was discussing with DH yesterday as he was surprised they went ahead when the alleged victim didn’t want it

I said that women often withdraw from or don’t want DV prosecuted out of fear or intimidation. If the CPS dropped cases on that basis hardly anyone would be prosecuted for DV

CPS right to go ahead, they could not have foreseen what would happen

Also what @justcly said

@whatnow40 you can start any thread you like. I really don’t get why people complain about it.

Plus this is a discussion about CPS not Caroline Flack, it’s just been brought about by recent events and as such should be separate from the threads focused on her personal story imo.

I can see how distressing and disruptive it is to a couple when an incident becomes an arrest and when both parties want it left in the past but the CPS have to take a view about when that incident is breaking the law and when there's a good chance if a conviction. There must be plenty of evidence of an assault, and assault is illegal. It does come down to that. Abusers frequently cover up/minimise/blame themselves etc anything not to fan the flames - that results in assaults going unpunished, which is why the courts have a duty to step in.

My brother went to prison and I wrote a character statement singing his praises, we "fought" the conviction, appealed etc... we were terrified for him, as was he, But tbh ten years on I look back and think we were blinded by our love for him to see the damage he'd done and he actually deserved the sentence he ultimately got and has been a more decent human as a result of being given a boundary for once in his life. Sorry if that's a little off topic...

Agree. Would be interesting to see what public reaction would have been if a similar situation arose with a man involved.

That should have been "Abusees frequently cover up" not abusers...

We cannot live in a society where you can commit a crime, and despite evidence you've done so, it is purely up to the victim on whether uou should be prosecuted. The ramifications of that would be huge. And it's not just domestic violence.

Where would you draw the line? Can you physically assault someone, maim them, and if the victim says don't prosecute, even though you were caught on camera doing it, with witnesses, the police say " ok mate, no worries " and walk away?

Can you rob someone, steal all their belongings, trash their home, and if the victim says don't prosecute, say because they were intimiated, the police and cps are supposed to say no probs and turn a blind eye?

Can you beat the shit out of your spouse, every single day, do it on the streets in front of witnesses, in front of the children, and if he or she says don't prosecute, as they often do, the police say ok then, crack on?

Of course if there is evidence of a crime they need to prosecute. What the hell kind of society would we live in, if people only faced the consequences of the law if the victim said so?

I think it is odd, not least because how would they have ever made a case that would stand up in court if the victim didn't want it?

I'm not sure how the crime stats work, but I'd have thought from the police POV, to be able to record that there had been no actual crime would be preferable to chasing an unlikely prosecution, so I'd imagine there must have been something very compelling that we don't know about.

But I also think that it's odd that in a world where only a tiny % of DV results in prosecution, this case was seized upon in this way.

We all know that if a man facing the same allegations had taken his life the response would have been completely different.

It's all very puzzling, I hope for their peace of mind that the prosecutors are clear about why they handled it as they did.

I think the tabloid press are pushing the CPS angle to deflect from the awful things they said about Caroline in her last few months.

I think it is odd, not least because how would they have ever made a case that would stand up in court if the victim didn't want it?

Very easily, evidence from the scene, his injuries, what was said at the time, what was said on the 999 call, what she was heard saying, what the paramedics dealt with, what was said in police statements etc.

If they have enough evidence, which clearly they felt they had, then there is nothing difficult about making a case stand up in court irrelevant of the victims feelings on the matter.

I don't understand why the alleged offence was spattered on every website, tabloid paper sex etc without the information jeopardizing any pending prosecution?

I think the CPS were right in going forward with the prosecution but I don't know the details and should not have been able to pass any judgement based upon a newspaper article.

Would I be very happy to see all perpetrators of crime remain anonymous until a conviction is secured : I think so