The verdict is in, and Nigel Evans, the MP for Ribble Valley, has been found not guilty of various charges of sexual misconduct. Presuming that the verdict is the right one, and one should presume that, he is now free to pick up his life where he left off when the charges were laid against him. And whilst I suspect that his life will never be quite the same again, given the unforgiving nature of some people, I can only hope that he is given some space and privacy to come to terms with his experiences.
However, I do note that some of his friends and supporters are suggesting that the Crown Prosecution Service should now be held accountable in some way. Might I suggest that this isn't a very sensible response?
You see, the role of the CPS is to assess accusations of criminality I'm order to decide whether or not it is in the public interest to seek prosecution. Where the charges are especially serious and, on the face of it, the evidence appears credible enough, the public would expect the matter to end up in court in order that it might be tested. In this instance, it seems that the jury felt that Mr Evans's behaviour was foolish or unwise, rather than criminal, and I have to admit that the witnesses, based on the reporting I have read, did not come across as being entirely credible. However, that only emerged through cross-examination and the probing of the defence.
And, if these charges had not been prosecuted, the CPS might well have been accused of a coverup - something that would be bad for justice and, in the long run, probably bad for Mr Evans. He has the advantage of having been cleared, rather than having to suffer death by emerging rumour and media innuendo.
No, if you are a friend of Nigel Evans, you'll be offering him your support, helping him to deal with the aftermath, and helping him to be a little more cautious when it comes to alcohol - one of the factors which appears to have led to the court case. And if he's the person that you think he is, you'll be doing him, and politics, a favour.
Just to point out, that the inconsistencies in the complainants' accounts were flagged up by the Crown, not the defence. The Police Disclosure Officer finds such material and flags it up to the CPS and the Defence. To suggest that it is the cross examination that revealed these matters is incorrect.
ReplyDelete