Woman alleges sexual assault by Greater Manchester Police whilst in custody

[inkjet]

https://news.sky.com/story/stripped-and-left-topless-in-a-cell-i-was-drugged-and-sexually-assaulted-by-greater-manchester-police-12924141

The missing footage could be the section which is under investigation. If it is under investigation, they will not release that part to her or her defence team prior to any trial etc.

The 40 hours in custody - does this include the time she has been at the hospital? We can only hold people for 24 hours without extensions being applied for. The custody clock will stop if she has been at hospital whilst she is in custody.

The effects of cocaine can last a lot longer than 15-30 minutes.

Was she charged with anything or released on bail. I note that that an officer's glasses were knocked off at some stage?

The video footage was released as part of a subject access request, not for any reasons related to any kind of trial. Any omissions in the data that was asked for should have been noted and explained as to why they weren't providing the information.

Zayna doesn't have a "defence team" because she isn't facing any charges in relation to this incident.

The at least 40 hours in custody is the time covered by the CCTV footage and the logs during which time Zayna was detained at the police station. It doesn't include any time spent at hospital. No explanation, justification or authorisation was given for detaining her for that long.

Honestly, people commenting need to at least read the Sky News article that is linked in the OP to avoid asking questions that are specifically covered in the article and the linked video.

Have you watched all 40 hours or are you just assuming this from the article?
Was there any spells at hospital during this time frame?

If its part of an investigation the footage won't be released - yes I agree it should have been explained why it is missing - but that could be a reason why its no released.

3 hours of footage are missing, so no one has watched the full footage apart from GMP.

You are implying that the Sky News producer Liz Lane, who did watch all the provided footage and read the logs, is either lying or deliberately misreporting the content, for reasons that are a mystery to me. The only time that Zayna says she was in hospital and is recorded as being in hospital was after the 40 plus hours being held in the police station, this is also what is in the police logs. Read the article and/or watch the Sky News report, and try doing some listening and thinking.

Ahh - the Greater Manchester Police - responsible for jailing an innocent man for rape while the real rapist remains at large:

https://twitter.com/gmpolice/status/1684220430607867904?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Yet more police officers displaying a casual acquaintance with the truth, good policing and protecting women from VAWG. There seems to be no end to it - along with their ability to repeatedly defend the indefensible.

RoseslnTheHospital
Are you suggesting that journalists never lie or bend the truth to suite the article.

If you have read the logs - what was the disposal? Was she charged or released on bail?

I don't think anyone has suggested that 4 female officers stood and watched no. If you read the articles on the story there's many gaps in her 40 hours. First one being in the police van on the way to custody. They also lie saying she has been seen by a doctor, she hasnt. Doesn't see a medical professional until she is released. In the report logs it states she isn't fit for custody more than once.
If they have nothing to hide, show her the footage. Looks to me like there is something and it's being covered up. Which isn't a shock given the recent shit from the police and not reporting there own officers.

MrsOvertonsWindow
Ahh - the Greater Manchester Police - responsible for jailing an innocent man for rape while the real rapist remains at large:

He was originally convicted by a jury, based on eye witness testimony.

Do we ignore eye witness testimony now and solely base rape trails on DNA evidence?

If that's the case - any rapist will have a water tight defence by saying "My DNA is present because we had consensual sex"

The police present their case, the CPS either agree to prosecute - or not and then it goes to court. Surely you know something as simple as that?

Although I am aware that it's been previously exposed on here that you may not be the police officer you repeatedly claim to be. As Mumsnet regularly remind us,
"not everyone on the internet is who they claim to be".

No response needed. I will not respond to them or fuel any of your attempts to steer this thread into your particular niche obsessions.

Ah. GMP.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/kate-green-npcc-greater-manchester-police-met-england-b2270687.html

believe her.
GMP covered up the repeated grooming of teenage girls for years and tried to justify it.
They are my local police force and I wouldn’t trust them ever.

Jesus what a shit show

I believe her

When Zayna went to hospital afterwards and the medics there discovered sexual injuries, there was reference to 'a date rape drug'

Cocaine is not a date rape drug and she was arrested while under the effects of it - she was agitated and struggling

Call me deeply deeply cynical but I am wondering if they kept her in custody for so long to try and make sure whatever they'd given her to make her barely conscious/compliant/anaesthetised was out of her system as much as possible to make it less likely it would be discovered subsequently.

Am I way off base here do you think? There's no reason to have kept her in for 40 hours is there? It was a welfare call originally, she knocked glasses off a policewoman's face when they were at her house - if they were concerned for her welfare why keep her in custody for 40 hours? She should be in hospital? There's no evidence for a medical exam - it's in the log but not on CCTV.

A spokesperson for GMP said: "Greater Manchester Police is committed to delivering outstanding service to all those the force comes in to contact with. If service is proven to have fallen below an acceptable level, the force apologises and takes the necessary action.

ffs

clean house you arseholes

AHugeTinyMistake
I am assuming she was arrested for assault on emergency worker. They will need to wait until she becomes fit to be interviewed for that offence.

Not sure why it took 40 hours for this - unless it included a stay in hospital at some point whilst in custody.

MrsOvertonsWindow
Yes - I know it goes to CPS who authorise a charge.
It then goes through a whole host of legal arguments before the trail

But at some point, the eye witnesses were examined & cross examined and the jury made their decision based on the evidence.

Do we ignore eye witness testimony now and solely base rape trails on DNA evidence?

"clean house you arseholes" quite. It's truly a shit show.

@AHugeTinyMistake I was thinking the same thing. They were waiting for it to clear her system.

She was not fit to be in custody. If she was in hospital it would have been entered in the log. Instead they put in that she was seen by a doctor which did not happen. They have the missing 3 hours.

But at some point, the eye witnesses were examined & cross examined and the jury made their decision based on the evidence.

But GMP withheld evidence. Andrew Malkinson was denied a fair trial 'because of “grave and repeated” disclosure failings by Greater Manchester police'.

They didn't disclose that one 'witness' only came forward on the day he was arrested, was a long-term heroin addict with multiple convictions, and at the time was facing 14 criminal charges. Charges which should have resulted in 'imprisonment and substantial fines', but strangely ended with just 2 cautions and a £145 fine, 'raising questions over his motivation'.

The disclosure failure made it possible to present him to the jury as honest and independent – and came despite explicit requests for witnesses’ criminal records.

The victim caused a deep scratch on the rapist's face, which broke one of her nails. Malkinson was seen by police the next day with no scratches. The police took photographs of the victim's hand on the night of the attack, showing one nail was 'significantly shorter than the others'. The court wasn't given the photographs, and because of that, the judge invited the jury to 'consider that the victim might have been mistaken in her memory about the scratch'.

Then GMP destroyed the victim's clothing whilst a preservation order was still in place.

GMP stitched him up.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/26/andrew-malkinson-greater-manchester-police-failings-denied-man-fair-trial-court-told

Can I also point out that she had sexual injuries. Key word being injuries. Not evidence of recent sexual activity. Injuries.

I believe her

Plus he looked nothing like the e fit and had the wrong accent.

As a previous poster put it, clean your house you arseholes.

It shows how desperate some men are to defend incompetent and corrupt policing despite the shedload of evidence and multiple apologies.
And - yet again - the police leave a rapist free to roam the streets.

Same. I believe her and I no longer trust the police. Its revolting.