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

Oh yes. Once might be understandable. Even twice. After three times it becomes a bit odd.

And when it appears to be your sole hobby, it tells me all I need to know.

Fairly sure the attacker also had a shaved chest and he had a full chest hair growth.

ffs!! If it wasn't so bloody serious it would be clownish

His solicitors say Malkinson did not match key parts of the victim’s original description of the attacker. He was three inches taller, had chest hair, when her attacker’s chest was described as hairless and shiny, and also had prominent tattoos on his forearms when no tattoos were mentioned.

Malkinson has now been told he will have money deducted from his compensation (if he wins) for wrongful imprisonment for his "board and food" because he will have made "substantial savings on his living costs" whilst he was in prison.

I cannot imagine just how enraging this must be for him.

I believe her.
God, what a terrible state of affairs. GMP and doubtless so many other areas, rotten to the core.
I fear for my daughters and nieces, I really do.
Zayna is remarkably brave to do this. May she get the answers, apology and compensation that she deserves.

The board and lodgings thing is just so insane that I can hardly believe it to be true. It's so perverse and bizarre that any organisation could make such a statement.

I would contribute to a fundraiser to pay that for him rather than he loses a substantial chunk of any possible compensation.

I also thought it was complete madness and must be a weird interpretation of something that surely never happens. So I looked it up, and found this. I'm still scraping my jaw off the floor.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/uk-66324801.amp

The bit about 'they'll have saved money on a paying mortgage' is just

Absolute insanity.

Christ on a bike. Talk about go out of your way to paint yourselves as utterly monstrous.

But.... but...here in the real world it's not like a bank lets you off your repayments because you're in prison. If you own a house and want to keep owning it you still have to pay, surely?

What happened to the grown ups being in charge with logic and facts? Who let the toddlers take control?

yourhairiswinterfire
But GMP withheld evidence. Andrew Malkinson was denied a fair trial.......

The evidence was put before a jury - and the jury convicted based on that evidence.

Are you saying that because someone is a drug addict and has a criminal record they cannot be believed? Would this be the same for a victim/survivor of sexual offence - we should automatically not believe them if they have a criminal record?

What is the evidence line with the scratch on the face - is the victim 100% certain she scratched his face - or has she said that she believes she might have scratched his face. It could be that she lost the her nail whilst fighting her attacker off and caught it on his clothing. If that is the case then the police solely basing their enquiries for a man with a scratch on his face become irrelevant as they attacker may not have one. Unless you have seen her statement/ABE interview you cannot judge the significance of this scratch.

Destroying the clothing - has it been subject to DNA examination using chemical treatment? If its low copy count DNA, the clothing will be destroyed by that process alone.

The suspect was 3 inches shorter/taller - do you honestly think that a victim/survivor or a rape will be able to give an accurate description of his height to within an inch.....?

It is laughable yet at the same time abhorrent how keen some people are to defend the police at all costs, focussing on all the wrong elements of the situation and constantly implying that women are generally liars.

Lol, he was the wrong guy!

he's completely innocent.

the "evidence" was partly fabricated by two junkies who were miraculously let off their charges afterwards.

Stop it. You only add to the impression that the police are corrupt at worst, idiotic at best, on so many issues.

Defending the police who withheld information in a case where the conviction was overturned only this week as a dreadful miscarriage of justice. I wish I could say 'unbelievable' but, no.

Brefugee

So from now on we will not believe any 'junkie' then

Does that include 'junkies' who make a report that they have been raped....?

Datun
Lol, he was the wrong guy!

Take it up with the jury and the court then

There was zero evidence. Zilch. He didn't do it.

The police are idiots. Or nasty wankers. Take your pick.

Apart from the two eye witnesses who gave their evidence under oath which the jury took into consideration.

And at no point has the victim/survivor stated in the trail that "this is not the man who raped me."

So now it's the victim's fault that the police fitted him up? Unbelievable.

Oscar delta foxtrot Oscar foxtrot

I’m sure you are aware that that is essentially a watertight defence, and many rapists do indeed claim this. Hence conviction rates at an all time low.

I was dragged off the street by a stranger (caught on CCTV), and violently raped (multiple injuries). The rapist was disturbed, because I was screaming so loudly I woken up people in nearby houses. He still claimed it was consensual, and it went to a majority verdict because a couple of jurors thought, against all the circumstantial evidence, that a married doctor on her way home from a late shift might have consented to rough sex in public with a random stranger and then started screaming for no reason. People with less watertight cases get off all the time using the “it was consensual guv!” defence.

My liaison police office told me the two defences rapists use are “it wasn’t me”, and if that doesn’t work “I thought she consented”. Almost impossible to prove otherwise unless there is an impartial witness.

Christ almighty @Saschka

I'm glad you got the verdict in the end but some people are just desperate to let men off aren't they. Disgraceful.

Saschka
Precisely - which is why other evidence, such as eye witness testimony, CCTV, medical examination etc etc, is used

AHugeTinyMistake
Where have i blamed the victim?

If it wasn't them male - then why wasn't he eliminated via a ID parade for example?

PC Goon at it again, is he? 😂