Benjamin Mendy charged with eight counts of rape against five women | Released on Bail
- Thread starter TheReligion
- Start date
- Status
You think just because he can run quite fast and has a nice physique that he'll somehow be immune from the gangs and brutal characters he'll face in jail?
As an "alleged" sex offender?
Probably 'banter'. I'm surprised he hasn't been removed from it like he and others have from Fifa/Football Manager.
I don’t think I would because I’m not that stupid, but I don’t think it has anything to do with race. Imagine you never jeard about the guy, google “Mendy footballer” or something like that and you copy the first photo. It is stupid but what’s the chance there are two other famous footballers with the same last name?
well That’s a stupid idea
Absolutely, yeah. Did you hear stories about Adam Johnson getting brutalised by gangs every week for being a paedophile?
but we're talking about football journalists
even if we weren't and they were regular journalists, it's such a ridiculous mistake
I'm not saying it's definitely about race, I just find it hard to believe that this keeps happening through honest mistakes
it's proper weird, to say the very least
Really? People really are f'ing weird
You just explained why it definitely will be.. Besides, rapists and pedophiles aren't the most popular among criminals.
Why? The state shouldn't incarnate people who have not been convicted of a crime. If the prosecution can't get their shit together in 90 days then something is badly wrong.
The right to a speed trial is a basic human right, goes back to Magna Carta.
I never get this… so often with stories like this it’s common practice for people who are supposedly opposed to rape, to start wishing rape on another person…
I mean, if you hate rape that much and view it as a lowly, repulsive, cowardly act… wouldn’t you want less rape in the World!?
There’s plenty of ways for people to be punished / feel miserable / be rehabilitated without somebody else committing ANOTHER rape.
I understand shadenfreude etc but ffs wishing rape on another person, or laughing away at how utterly broken and pointless the prison service is so bleak and pathetic.
Its a snowball effect where the first victim comes forward, then others will make contact with the police when they see that someone already had the bravery to take the first massive step and seek action against their assailant.
The police will interview the various defendants and look for corroborating elements that fit into what they can already confirm about the suspects behavior, descriptions of his home, distinctive body markings, penis. Essentially anything that can confirm that the victim has had a sexual encounter with the defendant, and if the act has been non consensual. If for example 2 or 3 victims all tell the same story with assault elements already known to investigators independently of each other, they can form a very strong case. One victim coming forward and saying "This man assaulted me" is often very hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas multiple victims coming forward and are all able to describe a scene they would not be aware of unless they at the very least had sex with the defendant, then the accused gets a real explanation problem.
Interviews will be conducted with the defendant and the defendants close assosciates who may have been with or near him at the time of the assaults to establish a timeline and confirm certain elements of the accusations that the defendant may not know that the investigators are looking for directly. For example: Victim A) says that she fell asleep on the sofa and woke up without her pants on in the defendants bed, whereas friend 1) confirms that they were drinking and he went home after the girl had fallen asleep on the sofa but his friend was still awake. The investigators can askt the defendant a series of questions, for example: "When did you go to bed?" The defendant answers: "I went to bed before anyone fell asleep".
If the stories don't allign, the investigators can piece together that more than 1 woman has described a certain situation, the defendant is telling something else and friend 1) has given us a response indicating that the defendant is lying.
These interviews are hours long and are designed to lure deceptive defendants into lies they will have a hard time explaining at trial. If you're being dishonest, you're going to have a hard time keeping your detailed story accurate at every turn, eventually you will be caught lying about something you didn't recall.
Anyway, the point I'm making here is that all counts of rape are a result of very thorough questioning and investigation, and they've all met the criteria of believable enough for the crown to accuse the defendant of rape.
If you're charged with seven counts of rape, there is almost no chance you're not very guilty.
I imagine clubs of this stature have clauses in players’ contracts to deal with this. His wages are probably placed into escrow until a verdict is decided, if innocent he reclaims his wages and if otherwise, the club simply reclaims what was placed in that external depositary.
I still can’t believe he was playing for City whilst on bail.
you clearly have no idea on the complexities of some cases so we’ll just leave it there.
Also, basing a modern day justice system on something that happened 800 years ago seems a bit archaic too. Times need to change.
and with that, some people need, and deserve, to stay in a prison cell whilst the trial is sorted out. However long that may take.
Are you really going to advocate for releasing someone like Mendy who was already under investigation for the same offences when he has then gone on to commit the same offences multiple times whilst also being investigated??
I think the argument is Pro faster trials rather than releasing him on bail.
Which I agree with as a matter of principle. It's a systemic issue that is not easily solved though.
You very much have no clue on how the justice system works.
A person is presumed innocent/not guilty, until the state proves otherwise. And because of that, if the state needs to detain someone based on suspicion of a crime, the burden of proof is on the state to prove guilt. Until then, every caution must be taken to ensure that the detention of someone who is presumed innocent until guilty, is kept to a bare minimum.
So the police thinking Mendy is a rapist, is not enough to detain him indefinitely. The state is responsible for ensuring he is brought to trial as soon as is humanely possible, and not a second longer, unless he waives that right on advice of his councel. And the trial cannot drag on... Present your evidence, call your witnesses, allow the defense to cross-examine... And come to a verdict ASAP. If you can't do that, release him. The state does not have a right to detain citizens indefinitely.
You saying this basic principle going back 800 years is archaic, is crazy. The right of a speedy trial protects all citizens, including yourself, should you ever be jammed up.
No, it is very much solved easily.
Force the prosecution to bring a case to trial within 90 days of arrest, unless the suspect waives that right. If you cannot satisfy that requirement, release the suspect (who is still a suspect at that point!!!).
This is very simple. I know the (stupid, idiotic, moronic, dumb) court of public opinion works differently, but we shouldn't give our government the right to detain suspects indefinitely on their side of the story. Get your conviction, then you can detain/deport to 'Straya all you want.
100% we should try and do things faster.
Unfortunately, that just isn’t going to happen and in a lot of serious, complex cases, can’t happen
The state also have a responsibility to protect innocent victims.
In this particular case, I would argue the need to protect people from a possible rapist outweighs the release of said suspected rapist.
It is also not the Police who choose to detain him. The Police will request that he be remanded/continually detained, but the courts will be the decision maker about it.
One more point that has been made in this thread.
The police will lie, use every trick in the book, to get a suspect they believe has committed a crime, to confess.
Which is why, as opposed to an interrogation room without counsel, the court is (an imperfect but) the best arena for determining what exactly happened. The questioning that occurs by the police is evidence that can be cross-examined by the defense, and thrown out by the judge if proven to be inaccurate or provided under duress or another illegality. Plus, the assumption that witness testimony is rock solid, doesn't fly. If you're on the stand testifying, then the defense will cross-examine you (reasonably of course) and your testimony better hold up.
Charges don't mean shit. Charges that stand up under the bright light of cross-examination and a court environment, those count.
No no no Michael it's not right
If you think he is a rapist, fine, detain him. But you can't use public safety as an argument for detaining a suspect indefinitely. Slippery slope arguments are lazy, admitted, but the power of indefinite suspension is one too great to be granted to any government on this earth. You and I and the public are not safe if the government can find a suitable excuse (in the interest of public safety) to detain you for as long as they want.
If the prosecution cannot be ready for trial in 90 days they probably need to be sacked anyways
The system is in disarray at the moment. My wife was defending a guy, who along with an alleged accomplice, was charged with burglary.
His accomplice pleaded guilty, got full credit, and was out before he even had a trial. He ended up being found not guilty but was incarcerated for longer than the guy who was found guilty.
In family law it's arguably even worse. There's children in foster care who are in absolute purgatory because whilst there are ongoing proceedings they aren't able to be adopted. On another one of her cases there were three children 3 and under who were to be adopted to the same family (final hearing April 2020). By the time the courts had concluded adoption was the best/only option, the eldest was over 5, showing signs of mental health problems (unsurprisingly) and the family were only able to adopt the youngest two. The eldest therefore had to be separated from his two siblings (at this point his only family in the world) and is destined for a life in the care system.The difference between the hearing taking 3 months and 18 months for him will last his entire life.
I think for complex fraud or medical negligence cases for example you would need longer. However in my view there should be a 3 month limit and you'd need to partition a judge for an extension, with it only being granted in exceptional circumstances (rather than currently where extensions to the already inequitable 8 month limit are nodded through habitually).
What if it is the defence who aren’t ready/can’t be ready etc?
Remand is not indefinite either. There is time limits on all of this.
I 100% believe that public safety should be taken into consideration when discussing whether someone should be on bail or remanded in custody. I’m not saying whether I think he is guilty or not but someone at the CPS clearly think that they have a realistic chance of a conviction on at least 6 allegations of rape. Someone else in the justice system also presumably thinks that in this case, the suspect is enough of a risk to the public to detain him until the trial is complete.
I have no issue with it in the this case, although I wholeheartedly agree that it (remand) should not be a tool to be used if every situation. And I also wholeheartedly agree that trials should be much quicker.
Unfortunately, it is not that simple
He's not even registered in City's squad so the PL should have removed him from that. Guessing they've got a certain Everton player still available to be picked who is in same situation in terms of squad status?
The guys who broke into a beach house my friends and I were staying at, robbed us, stole our cars, raped one of my friends, tied us up and threatened to kill us more than once including holding a gun to my head multiple times, spent many months in jail while waiting for their trial to be called. I was glad. I wish they spent longer. It’s one of those times that being in a third world country and having such a huge backlog of cases that take a long time to get through, made me happy. Every moment of their lives that they lose is justice to me.
There are a lot of people on FF who try to join in with friends/ families / partners.
If this is new buys this week it must be down to that. This could come in two forms... Random selection... Oh Man City are a good team right, let's get their defence to oh I'm sure I've heard that Mendy guy before he must be good.
It depends.
Let's say defense is provided for the defendant because they are too poor to afford their counsel. Then the court provided counsel is expected to provide a competent level of defense before and during trial. Sometimes they may recommend that a defendant waive their right to a speedy trial, in order to give them additional time to create a solid case for dismissal. But that remains a right that can only be waived by the defendant. And regardless, if the defendant doesn't waive the right, then they are still owed a solid defense. Otherwise all charges can be dismissed.
If the defendant can afford their own defense, then the onus is on their lawyers to advise the defendant of the best course of action. The government is not responsible for you deciding to hire a shitty lawyer though.
There are time limits, yes. Those time limits should be set in accordance with making sure that a proper trial is had, and the rights of the defendant (who is still innocent in the eyes of the law) are not violated. If a judge (not the CPS) deems that the evidence mandates an extended period in detention, then fine, although I would rather avenues for home detention be explored, where the defendant is not allowed to be a danger to the public, yet still can be free in their home abode pending trial.
I typed all of that not realizing we are on the same page, but there you go
No, that Everton player was known to be unavailable before the game launched so was never included. Once someone has been included for the season though, they are never removed as it presumably would be a technical headache for those who have them in their team.
It depends.
Let's say defense is provided for the defendant because they are too poor to afford their counsel. Then the court provided counsel is expected to provide a competent level of defense before and during trial. Sometimes they may recommend that a defendant waive their right to a speedy trial, in order to give them additional time to create a solid case for dismissal. But that remains a right that can only be waived by the defendant. And regardless, if the defendant doesn't waive the right, then they are still owed a solid defense. Otherwise all charges can be dismissed.
If the defendant can afford their own defense, then the onus is on their lawyers to advise the defendant of the best course of action. The government is not responsible for you deciding to hire a shitty lawyer though.
There are time limits, yes. Those time limits should be set in accordance with making sure that a proper trial is had, and the rights of the defendant (who is still innocent in the eyes of the law) are not violated. If a judge (not the CPS) deems that the evidence mandates an extended period in detention, then fine, although I would rather avenues for home detention be explored, where the defendant is not allowed to be a danger to the public, yet still can be free in their home abode pending trial.
I typed all of that not realizing we are on the same page, but there you go
I’m not sure where you currently live or where you were brought up but I do not know what this speedy trial is. As far as I am aware, and I am based in the UK, a person gets charged with an offence and then a court date is set dependent on the suspect’s remand status.
A trial date will then be set and there are various time limits on when things need to be done by in order for the trial to go ahead as planned. Obviously, these tend to be moved depending on the severity and complexities of the case.
The suspect’s remand status will be considered all the way through with bail applications thrown in if somebody is on remand and a judge making a decimal whether they should be released on bail or kept in prison.
There will be various things considered when remanding anyone, including risk to the public, propensity to re-offend and flight risks.
I would argue in this specific case, Mendy needs to be where he is because he has almost habitually reoffended and is a risk to parts of the public.
I have huge issues with how fast court cases take to get finalised but then the justice system is a joke from start to finish. It’s the same with getting investigations completed in a timely manner
No he is in, 34 people have transferred him in this week.
Why don’t fifa make his stats really bad??
I don’t think he’s in Football Manager nor the Everton player
Unfortunate name of his accomplice. Just in case there’s any confusion it’s not the one that played for United, Everton and Fulham
I assume IF he's found guilty he'll be deported back to France and serve the long sentence in one of their jails?
How can he be trusted to not commit further crimes while he's out on bail this time? It allegedly didn't stop him from doing so the last time.
Jeez.
More proof that if you’re rich and famous you don’t get treat the same as everyone else.
Bail?? Really??
Feck me, he is a literal danger to society ffs! No way this idiot get's bail without being a famous and rich.
Disgusting.
Feck me, he is a literal danger to society ffs! No way this idiot get's bail without being a famous and rich.
Disgusting.
- Status