RAF Officer on Trial
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
RAF Officer on Trial
Not a thread for a funny title, and I won't paste the content. Suffice it to say it's not pleasant. Innocent until proven guilty, but even the circumstances if on an RAF official sports expedition are reprehensible.
RAF officer "forced student to perform sex acts on him" (Brighton Argus)
RAF officer "forced student to perform sex acts on him" (Brighton Argus)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,025
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
If true, he deserves everything he gets.... And some
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,025
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
Hence the IF TRUE.
The problem with local rags is they can be a bit crap... Note the recently added correction at the end where they state that he was not an Officer and that he has since been acquitted; given the article appears to have been published yesterday, maybe they should have just waited for a verdict rather than smearing someone's name!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting add on!
I wonder how much other info wasn't quite correct. I can only add to my above comment re Aspergers and truth or dare. some things the young lad were supposed to have done or said didnt seem right.
I wonder how much other info wasn't quite correct. I can only add to my above comment re Aspergers and truth or dare. some things the young lad were supposed to have done or said didnt seem right.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Because it was in my local paper and, as stated, regardless of verdict, the reported circumstances brought the RAF into disrepute. Plying someone under age with booze when the bar staff won't serve them is dubious at the best of times.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
ORAC, perhaps a stiff letter to the rag on journalistic accuracy.
Is it the truth
Is is it accurate
Is it helpful to all concerned
Is it the truth
Is is it accurate
Is it helpful to all concerned
Yet done on countless detachments............... hell, sometimes a newby got a dubious lady thrown in as well!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,025
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
What I cannot understand is they have edited the Article from Officer to Engineer, but have still left it up and simply amended the title but left it running with the title.
when by their own admittance the act never took place and the person involved had been cleared
I hope he sues the pants of them, as surely to continue to amend the article which still infers it happened after it has been proven in a court that it did not... would that not be libel, even though they put the retraction at the end? surely the whole article should have been rewritten to correct it and the title should read now
RAF engineer found not guilty of performing sex act
RAF engineer ‘forced student to perform sex acts on him’
Jonathon Coundon has since been acquitted of the charge. A previous version of this article referred to Mr Coundon as an officer rather than an aircraft engineer. The Argus apologises for this typographical error.
RAF engineer found not guilty of performing sex act
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
What I cannot understand is they have edited the Article from Officer to Engineer, but have still left it up and simply amended the title but left it running with the title.
when by their own admittance the act never took place and the person involved had been cleared
I hope he sues the pants of them, as surely to continue to amend the article which still infers it happened after it has been proven in a court that it did not... would that not be libel, even though they put the retraction at the end? surely the whole article should have been rewritten to correct it and the title should read now
RAF engineer found not guilty of performing sex act
when by their own admittance the act never took place and the person involved had been cleared
I hope he sues the pants of them, as surely to continue to amend the article which still infers it happened after it has been proven in a court that it did not... would that not be libel, even though they put the retraction at the end? surely the whole article should have been rewritten to correct it and the title should read now
RAF engineer found not guilty of performing sex act
"Airman acquitted at Lewes Crown Court".
So 3 years after the alleged act, the boy told his girlfriend the story. The newspaper than decided to publish even before the trial ended with his acquittal and all they do is hide behind a 'typographical error. Yea, right!. I too hope the serviceman sues.
