[an error occurred while processing this directive]
False Accuser Won't Be Charged
posted by Nightmist on Tuesday April 16, @07:51AM
from the false-accusastions dept.
False Accusations Dan Lynch submitted this article from the Ottawa Citizen. According to the story, Cathy Fordham, who falsely accused Jamie Nelson, 35, of raping her, also allegedly falsely accused several other men. Nelson was exonerated after 3.5 years in prison. But... Mr. Nelson's [false accusations] complaint was investigated by Ottawa police Sgt. Garry Granger. Sgt. Granger's report was finished in January, and was forwarded to the Ottawa Crown attorney's office to determine if charges should be laid. However, in the meantime, Mr. Nelson filed a civil suit against the police, investigating officer Sgt. Robert Kerr, the Crown attorney who prosecuted him, Mark Moors, Ontario's Attorney General's office, and Ms. Fordham, 31. Because an Ottawa Crown attorney was named in the suit, Sgt. Granger's report was forwarded to the Belleville Crown's office to avoid a conflict of interest.

Source: Ottawa Citizen [newspaper]

Title: False accuser won't be charged

Author: Unknown/Ottawa Citizen Staff

Date: April 15, 2002

L.A. Times Covers CA Paternity Fraud Bill | One NH Democrat's Objections to the Men's Commission  >

  
'False Accuser Won't Be Charged' | Login/Create an Account | 17 comments | Search Discussion
Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. Mensactivism.org is not responsible for them in any way.
Jamie Nelson (Score:1)
by AFG (afg2112@yahoo.ca) on Tuesday April 16, @09:32AM EST (#1)
(User #355 Info) http://afg78.tripod.ca/home.html
It was Jamie Nelson's case (when he got released) that got me into the men's movement. Too bad it turned out this way, but i really expected no other end. I wish him luck in his civil actions.
You need your beets -- you recycle, recycle! Don't eat your beets -- recycle, recycle!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Rape Shield Law Must GO! (Score:1)
by Dan-Lynch on Tuesday April 16, @01:10PM EST (#5)
(User #722 Info)
The Rape shield laws are only being used as a weapon, and we are a mature enough society to decide whats relevant and what isn't. The problem with these types of criminal cases as its just like family court, guilty until proven innocent. The feminazis have destroyed every possible defence against this allegation, and have left it up to the word of the accusor. Witnesses galor can testify against the accusor, but judges will find frivolous ways of rejecting their testomony. They are afraid or sexist or stupid. Whats worse is the judges are told to do it that way, MEN ARE CONVICTED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSE not ones of rationality. Jamie Nelson was fighting for custody when the accusation came out. The justice system is a weapon for far to many who are abusing it. I hope Jamie does win against The prosicution and the police. As far as the investigation is concerned, I seem to remember someone saying something like "Do not RAT thy fellow officer", it would seem that the investigation would only help Jamie in his claim against the Crown. They stole three years of his life, his life was probably threatened every day, and his suicidal tendancies were non existance until he was so grotequely descriminated against. NEVER LET AMERICA TURN INTO WHAT CANADA IS!!!!!!!!CANADA IS THE MOST DESCRIMINATING COUNTRY IN THE WORLD AGAINST MEN. Its fine time we had men's studies here.
Dan Lynch, a lover of women.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
And why is she not being prosecuted? (Score:1)
by The Gonzo Kid (NibcpeteO@SyahPoo.AcomM) on Wednesday April 17, @07:27AM EST (#11)
(User #661 Info)
Because, if she is prosecuted, then the prosecutors have to admit they were wrong, and hoodwinked for political purposes. They then have to admit she was using them.

And also, because if she goes to jail, hubby might (And sad to say, "Might" is the right term to use) get the kids.

Can't have that.

---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]