Another one for the file: "Belfast woman cleared of battering elderly mum in row over table salt"

[Genesis1v27]

The story has very unpleasant details. It's hard to believe that this person was aquitted.

https://m.sundayworld.com/crime/courts/belfast-woman-cleared-of-battering-elderly-mum-in-row-over-table-salt/a931036709.html

I agree. Totally inappropriate.

I realise I risk coming across as a wishy-washy liberal - having already defended the judge I now find myself in the unusual situation of defending a PSNI officer!

Here's what s/he said: “He’s asked me to call him she” .
Note that s/he calls the son 'he' not 'she'. It looks like a simple statement of fact, not an inappropriate interruption to correct the mother's use of language.
It could even have been accompanied by an eyeroll.

As far as I can see, I don't think either the Judge or the police officer displayed any particular sympathy towards Mr Avanti, apart from using 'she', which seems to be pretty standard practice in courts, or lack of sympathy towards his mother. The Judge was constrained by legal procedures, and the officer seems to have simply stated a fact.

So fair's fair - I'm not sure they belong in 'The File' on the basis of the SW article; I'm open to correction of course if I've missed something.

I hope the poor women is being supported appropriately and her son isn't allowed anywhere near her.

@MarieDeGournay I assume that the OP was putting the report of a "woman" committing this crime in the file

Yes, the untruthful news reporting, the treatment of the accused as a woman by the police and court, which is an insult to any putative victim, and the acquittal despite strong apparent evidence of violence against an elderly woman, which strikes me as another example of a double standard operating for those claiming certain characteristics.

It looks like a simple statement of fact, not an inappropriate interruption to correct the mother's use of language.

Yes, ironically, it was only the current hegemony of gender ideology that made us all interpret it as the latter. In a sane world, the son's request would be taken as evidence that he's as mad as a box of frogs.

I love that his mother is having none of it: just hope she's kept safe from him.

Absolute nonsense. Serious issues with the evidence, no complainant....it was correct not to convict here. Procedures need to be robust every single time, otherwise we're all fucked

There was evidence of injuries and the victim said on camera that he had her up against the wall by her throat.

I thought it was accepted in court that DA victims could also be victims of coercion and therefore cases could proceed without them? Why is that not the case here?

I'm all for robust procedures but surely the elderly woman confirming then retracting allegations fits robust procedures for DA?

Obviously not, because the judge didn't make that decision just for the fun of it.

Presumably not. But why? The evidence is all there. It’s not surprising that the old lady is scared of her dangerous son. Why isn’t this being treated as the serious offence that it is?

It's fairly obvious that there are legal issues in this case that have not been reported. There are very strict legal procedures that are necessary to protect us all.

🤦‍♀️

I wish the press would stop lying about the key facts in cases like this. This was a male perpetrator.

What? If you’re elderly and being attacked, are your only choices a) just get bashed b)overcome the assailant by yourself, calmly dress and report the assault or c) escape outside if you can, shouting for help and crying and get accused of having dementia? Sucks to be old, around you at least.

Which the article makes very clear

Then why describe him as a woman in the headline

Why have one sex in the headline and another sex in the report? It’s ludicrous.