Press play, and watch the gif...



http://24.media.tumblr.com/7bbc1eb7a...oxt9o2_500.gif

XD that is toooo funny i'm still laughing

She could just bring up that he battered the **** out of his wife, slammed a weight-lifting barbell into her ribs and kicked her down a flight of stairs :shrug:

What difference does that make? Sometimes a victim changes their mind/are advised to drop charges because they can't cope with going through a prolonged trail or it's a pretty useless exercise because they have no proof after all this time and it's only one persons word against another.

The fact is, we don't know either way.

He IS innocent,Until he is proven guilty.If she said he'd done any of the things he was accused of he could sue her.

I think you will be proven wrong, these cases are very much at the end of their investigatve time and in Jim's case the investigations went on for well over a year.

All was looked and scrutinised and in the end they ended up as allegations, nothing more with no evidence that would prove giult,
That means in the eyes of the law, with no continuing investigation and with no cautions either, he has in effect done nothing worng.

Are you saying he has despite the massive investigation into him by the Police?
Are you saying he did commit those crimes?
Have you got evidence to substantiate that.?

I am well aware cases can be re-opened by the Police, I studied Law for 3 years,however I myself would dare bet now that no way will Jim stand trial for any of the allegations made against him.

He may well end up in court at some time in the future on some other brushes with the law,not crimes of a sexual nature however, not as to these allegations, no way.