Prosecutor that brought false accusation charge against Cambridge professor, despite lack of evidence, also prosecuted taxi driver on testimony of fee-ditching drunk woman.

iburiedmyshovel · 2017-09-17T19:52:16+00:00

Corinne Saunders-Silk, the prosecutor of the Cambridge assault false-accusation case, was also the prosecutor in a case involving a taxi driver who was charged with assaulting a woman with his vehicle, solely on her testimony, and that of a single, questionably independent witness.

The "victim" openly states

I was in charge of 13 other women so was only 5/10 on a scale of being drunk

So let's start with that. First of all, are these full grown adults, or children, because I don't understand how one is supposed to be "in charge of" all the others. Her own statement implies that these women are so irresponsible that they need someone to chaperone them. It's a testament to the feminist attitude that women are not responsible for their actions, especially when drunk. Despite this "responsibility", she claims that she was only "5/10" drunk. So moderately drunk is not only reasonable in her eyes, her role as "responsible," for the others, is supposed to give credibility to her lack of impairment?

The supposed incident itself

“The taxi driver drove off before I had chance to move back, and I spun and hit the side of the car before falling on the floor.”

The only way this is conceivable is: her arms were still inside the car, or she was free of the car, but was startled by its movement and spun and fell of her own accord. If it is the latter, then her admitted impairment should be to blame, not the driver. So let's consider the former. First, we need the rest of the story's context.

However when the women reached the hotel, an argument began after Rahman asked them to pay the £80 cleaning fee because one in the group had vomited 'everywhere' in the taxi half way through the journey.

So they had refused to pay the fee. Which means that they got out, paid through the window, and the driver was so ready to leave with having only received the £6, without the fee, without denigrating or shaming them for their behaviour, that he sped off immediately, before her arm had even cleared? What a fucking joke.

On the other hand, in his defense

"I've been a self-employed taxi driver for 19 years and deal with 20/30 drunk customers a week." "In my whole life something like this has never happened." "I'm a thoroughly gentle man, the whole community respect me."

In 19 years of history, he doesn't have a single incident, until he encounters three out of control, drunk girls?

One of the woman tried to clean the sick with tissue but I told her it wasn't enough and I needed the £80. ...[she] paid him while both were standing outside the vehicle and he had given her change before leaving. ...the victim had been aggressive to him and had chased his vehicle after he drove off, which was when she fell over.

Seems much more plausible, actually.

two taxis in the queue refused to take three of the women back to their hotel because they were 'too drunk'

So the other 10 all got taxis, but these women were so incredibly drunk, they were refused service twice? And they hold the weight of credibility? Solely on testimony? If there was no evidence of harm/injury, what is he even criminally liable for??

An independent witness, Anthony O'Neill, backed up the prosecution's account of events and denied claims by the defence that he was mistaken.

The only mark against the driver. But the credibility of this witness isn't listed in the article. Is he truly independent, or does he know one of the 13? Was he just white knighting to try and get laid? Maybe he got laid, and promised to testify for her? There's a whole slew of reasons why a man would lie on behalf of a woman, especially against a middle eastern man.

It seems pretty obvious that this accusation is false, or at the least, there is no criminal liability on behalf of the taxi driver. On the other hand, these women caused damage to the interior of his vehicle, and refused to pay the fee they agreed to prior to committing that damage.

The same prosecutor that brought this case to trial, despite no physical evidence, and centering on the testimony of the female "victim," is the same prosecutor that brought the assault case against the Cambridge professor, under the same circumstance of no physical evidence, hinging solely on the testimony of the supposed victim.

It is evidence of a pattern, women using the court system to victimize men they have discrepancies with, backed by the same Cambridge prosecutor, Corinne Saunders-Silk. It appears Cambridge men are at special risk of being systemically oppressed/victimized by women, under her rule of feminist terror. If I was a man in Cambridge, I would immediately consider moving.

Title	Prosecutor that brought false accusation charge against Cambridge professor, despite lack of evidence, also prosecuted taxi driver on testimony of fee-ditching drunk woman.
Author	iburiedmyshovel
Upvotes	12
Comments	1
Date	September 17, 2017 7:11 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/70pitr/prosecutor_that_brought_false_accusation_charge/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/prosecutor-that-brought-false-accusation-charge.1175407 https://theredarchive.com/post/1175407

Comments