Treat Barron Trump account of alleged attack cautiously – judge

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly9x06xqzeo

Posted by topotaul

12 Comments

  1. Impressive-Bird-6085 on

    I’d take most of what a member of the Trump family says with a massive doses of caution…. ⚠️!!

  2. Judging baron trump of his fathers actions will only push him further to being an absolute cunt. As far as I know he’s done nothing wrong other than being born.

  3. If the judge instructed the jury this way, there must be a reason…but his surname is not (and cannot be) that reason.

    We are talking about a woman being (allegedly) beaten here…I hope she gets the justice she (allegedly) deserves

    Note: (allegedly) is there because I fully recognise that I don’t know the details of the case

  4. > He added: “He might also have been asked whether his perception was biased because he was close friends with [the complainant].”

    > The judge said hearsay evidence could be considered, but jurors should be “careful” as it had not been given under oath and should “not convict the defendant mainly in reliance on it.”

    What a shit headline.

  5. Full transcript from the crown preosecution services

    Operator: “City of London Police, how can I help you?”

    Barron: “Oh I’m calling from the US, uh I just got a call from a girl, you know, she’s getting beat up. The address is (redacted).”

    Operator: “Yeah.”

    Barron: “(Redacted). This was happening about eight minutes ago. I just figured out how to, how to call someone. Uh, uh it’s really an emergency.”

    Operator: “What’s her name?”

    Barron: “Her name is (redacted).”

    Operator: “Her date of birth?”

    Barron: “She’s (inaudible), she’s (inaudible), it’s really an emergency please.”

    Operator: “Yeah I know, what’s her age?”

    Barron: “(Redacted).”

    Operator: “(Redacted) how do you know her?”

    Barron: “I mean these details don’t matter, she’s getting beat up like I-”

    Operator: “Yeah I know but I need to take information from you, so how have you come by this information?”

    Barron: “Uh I got a call from her with a guy beating her up.”

    Operator: “Okay how do you know her?”

    Barron: “I don’t think these details matter she’s getting beat up but okay fine, also I met her on social media, I don’t think that matters.”

    Operator: “You know I can-”

    Barron: “She’s getting beat up.”

    Operator: “Can you stop being rude and actually answer my questions. If you want to help the person, you’ll answer my questions clearly and precisely, thank you. So how do you know her?”

    Barron: “I met her on social media.”

    Operator: “OK.”

    Operator: “Know the partner’s name or the person that’s beating her up at all?”

    Barron: “No.”

    Operator: “And they’re at home, they’re not out into the street?”

    Barron: “Yes, correct.”

    Barron: “She’s getting really badly beat up and the call was about eight minutes ago, I don’t know what could have happened by now.”

    Operator: “OK.”

    Barron: “So, sorry for being rude.”

    Operator: “(Inaudible)”.

    Barron: “(Inaudible).”

    Barron: “For a reason I don’t know (inaudible).”

    Operator: “You saw a video on social media, what like a video call?”

    Barron: “No, No, I (inaudible) a video call.”

    Funny reading all the comments saying so much shit when you guys could have gotten all the information for yourselves. Gonna side with the Trump spawn on this one sadly.

  6. I hate Trump with a passion but Barron did the right thing

    The instructions from the judge seem fair too considering that Barron is not there to be cross examined

    >On Monday, a judge told Snaresbrook Crown Court that his account could be “mistaken or biased” by his friendship with the woman and warned jurors not to rely on it as the main basis for a conviction.

    >Matvei Rumiantsev, 22, is accused of assault, actual bodily harm, two counts of rape, intentional strangulation and perverting the course of justice by pressuring the woman to withdraw her complaints.

    >He denies all of the charges.

    >Giving legal directions on Monday, Mr Justice Bennathan KC said Trump had not given evidence under oath or been cross-examined.

    “If he had done so, no doubt he could have been asked about things such as whether he ever got a good view of what happened, whether he actually saw [the complainant] being assaulted, or jumped to this conclusion on the basis of her screams,” the judge said.

    He added: “He might also have been asked whether his perception was biased because he was close friends with [the complainant].”