@NellyPB
Yes, and there is no error in your choice of spellings. I used defense in all caps to place emphasis that the expert(s) in question are not neutral or impartial experts, they are advocates for and part of the defense.
I have no such struggles with the meaning of prima facie.
Long Time International Teacher Faces Extradition for Alleged Abuse
Re: Long Time International Teacher Faces Extradition for Alleged Abuse
However, the DEFENCE and the CLAIMANT should both be heard by the court (and the media) until a judgement has been given.
Reply
@NellyPB
In direct reply:
1) Shock, Trauma, conducting their own inquiry, maybe it took time to sink in. It is not uncommon at all for victims to delay reporting their abuse.
2) Bruising can continue to develop over an extended period of time.
Bruising can be the result of a number of causes and can occur simultaneously from different sources. You can have bruises from abuse and bruises from other sources of injury at the same time.
3) Maybe, coordinated sexual assaults with multiple perpetrators isnt impossible. Memory isnt infallible, especially under the conditions of shock and trauma.
4) The entire tenet of trace transfer is that when two objects interact/come in contact with each other, an exchange of material occurs between them even if its at the molecular level. Whether its identifiable, observable, collectible and testable is another matter. Yes, transfer would occur between an organism (human fingers for example) touching cloth, the organism would transfer some quantity of its surface material to the cloth and the cloth would transfer some quantity of its fiber material to the organism. Whether the location of the transfer can be identified, the material collected, and then tested is a matter of forensics. This transfer can occur on many different materials at different levels of concentration. The reflex is to assume that in addition to oils and sweat on the fingers and on the clothing, that some amount of intact cellular material would transfer and would be suitable for PCR/DNA amplification and then gene/DNA typing. Thats not the only materials though. A shared infectious agent, toner ink, food remnants, cosmetics, health and beauty products, any number of materials and substances can establish contact and exchange between the victim and assailant.
No, we dont know that, all we know is what the DEFENSE expert REPORTED, there s nothing self authenticating about the DEFENSE experts report. Even if we accept it on face validity, there are still numerous rationals for why the victim did not cooperate with the DEFENSE expert, and failed to corroborate the mother's claim. This is a child who may very well trust their own mother more than some stranger who is by definition an adversary, they are the DEFENSES expert after all, and thats on top of the previously mentioned shock and trauma.
5) How is it fuzzy? I do not think it means what you think it means. Fuzzy generally indicates a degree of indistinction between the resolution of two states. You look at a tree but its shape seems indistinct around the edges of demarcation suggesting its location in space shifts between two locations, creating an aura of relative location, instead of being able to definitively define its location the observer is left with a relative range of location for the object; "being somewhere between there and there".
6) This could simply be the first time the abuser has been reported. There may well be additional victims from previous abuse that are unknown.
7) That was then and this is now, and shes been charged now. Türkiye issued a warrant and applied for extradition. What they didnt hold her when they had the chance so they cant pursue justice.
8) Her reason is whining. Its most certainly a sign of guilt.
Because when you hear hoof beats you look for horses not zebras. The salient point is "rare", it would absolutely be even more rare given the circumstances of this case. Either:
A) The IT did it.
B) The child made it up.
C) The parents are attempting to conceal their own abuse.
D) Both A and C.
E) Both B and C.
If its B, whats the motivation?
If its C why now, why this IT? Why bring up abuse at all rather than some other mechanism of injury? An abuse allegation puts everything under a microscope, if youre an abuser you dont want to be under a microscope for any reason, you want obscurity. So whats the incentive of the parents pushing for this allegation at this particular time, what do they have to gain, what are the circumstances that necessitate pointing the finger at this IT, at this point in time? There isnt any thats been reported.
If its A there are plenty of deviant motivations for misconduct.
I agree with your last post. The court is in Türkiye, have the defendant get on a plane and plead their defense.
You seem unable or unwilling to counter this issue. All the merits and deficiencies of the case and charge are the venue of the Turkish courts. Hiding from them in Britain is still hiding. You continually try to argue your way around some position that suggests remaining a fugitive is an acceptable outcome. Even if extradition is denied, it doesnt make the Turkish warrant go away, nor any continuing or subsequent red notice.
In direct reply:
1) Shock, Trauma, conducting their own inquiry, maybe it took time to sink in. It is not uncommon at all for victims to delay reporting their abuse.
2) Bruising can continue to develop over an extended period of time.
Bruising can be the result of a number of causes and can occur simultaneously from different sources. You can have bruises from abuse and bruises from other sources of injury at the same time.
3) Maybe, coordinated sexual assaults with multiple perpetrators isnt impossible. Memory isnt infallible, especially under the conditions of shock and trauma.
4) The entire tenet of trace transfer is that when two objects interact/come in contact with each other, an exchange of material occurs between them even if its at the molecular level. Whether its identifiable, observable, collectible and testable is another matter. Yes, transfer would occur between an organism (human fingers for example) touching cloth, the organism would transfer some quantity of its surface material to the cloth and the cloth would transfer some quantity of its fiber material to the organism. Whether the location of the transfer can be identified, the material collected, and then tested is a matter of forensics. This transfer can occur on many different materials at different levels of concentration. The reflex is to assume that in addition to oils and sweat on the fingers and on the clothing, that some amount of intact cellular material would transfer and would be suitable for PCR/DNA amplification and then gene/DNA typing. Thats not the only materials though. A shared infectious agent, toner ink, food remnants, cosmetics, health and beauty products, any number of materials and substances can establish contact and exchange between the victim and assailant.
No, we dont know that, all we know is what the DEFENSE expert REPORTED, there s nothing self authenticating about the DEFENSE experts report. Even if we accept it on face validity, there are still numerous rationals for why the victim did not cooperate with the DEFENSE expert, and failed to corroborate the mother's claim. This is a child who may very well trust their own mother more than some stranger who is by definition an adversary, they are the DEFENSES expert after all, and thats on top of the previously mentioned shock and trauma.
5) How is it fuzzy? I do not think it means what you think it means. Fuzzy generally indicates a degree of indistinction between the resolution of two states. You look at a tree but its shape seems indistinct around the edges of demarcation suggesting its location in space shifts between two locations, creating an aura of relative location, instead of being able to definitively define its location the observer is left with a relative range of location for the object; "being somewhere between there and there".
6) This could simply be the first time the abuser has been reported. There may well be additional victims from previous abuse that are unknown.
7) That was then and this is now, and shes been charged now. Türkiye issued a warrant and applied for extradition. What they didnt hold her when they had the chance so they cant pursue justice.
8) Her reason is whining. Its most certainly a sign of guilt.
Because when you hear hoof beats you look for horses not zebras. The salient point is "rare", it would absolutely be even more rare given the circumstances of this case. Either:
A) The IT did it.
B) The child made it up.
C) The parents are attempting to conceal their own abuse.
D) Both A and C.
E) Both B and C.
If its B, whats the motivation?
If its C why now, why this IT? Why bring up abuse at all rather than some other mechanism of injury? An abuse allegation puts everything under a microscope, if youre an abuser you dont want to be under a microscope for any reason, you want obscurity. So whats the incentive of the parents pushing for this allegation at this particular time, what do they have to gain, what are the circumstances that necessitate pointing the finger at this IT, at this point in time? There isnt any thats been reported.
If its A there are plenty of deviant motivations for misconduct.
I agree with your last post. The court is in Türkiye, have the defendant get on a plane and plead their defense.
You seem unable or unwilling to counter this issue. All the merits and deficiencies of the case and charge are the venue of the Turkish courts. Hiding from them in Britain is still hiding. You continually try to argue your way around some position that suggests remaining a fugitive is an acceptable outcome. Even if extradition is denied, it doesnt make the Turkish warrant go away, nor any continuing or subsequent red notice.
Re: Long Time International Teacher Faces Extradition for Alleged Abuse
Just to correct you on a couple of points @PsyGuy
The child was not interviewed by the defence, but by law enforcement. It was recorded.
The defence forensic expert report has never been heard in the Turkish court. The claimant parents made a criminal complaint against the defence lawyers and the three forensic experts who had written the report. No action was taken after an investigation so they again complained about the lack of inaction. Again it was found that the experts acted within the agreements of the court.
I think 6 and a half years later or 20 plus years more of teaching, other victims would have come forward. For now, this is NO serial abuser.
Richardson left legally due to lack of concrete evidence. She had not been asked for DNA samples due to the child’s interview and the type of assault she alleged she experienced.
Richardson, like many of us in IT was an early years teacher. Normal, respectful, high quality care in EY would mean teachers support children and would handle clothing, hold hands, occasionally need to support children by picking them up etc. children would be toilet trained but accidents happen. Touch DNA would almost be a certainty from the alleged crime scene. From an incident at home 3 days later? Not so sure. It is ‘fuzzy’ because it is not clear who has been eliminated by testing. In the latest court records it appears it is the claimant child and a profile that is similar? This has not always been clear.
The news says Richardson will not be extradited. There is no info about the actual judgement. Despite this, her team have attempted many times for her to be heard and she still has a right to a fair trial.
The UK currently has an agreement with Türkiye that all RPs must serve their sentence Yalvac prison.
I admire your dedication and support to survivors, but this is a forum for ITs and you yourself know that accusations happen to us all. People are innocent until proven guilty. I don’t believe for one second that Richardson is engaging in DARVO principles.
The child was not interviewed by the defence, but by law enforcement. It was recorded.
The defence forensic expert report has never been heard in the Turkish court. The claimant parents made a criminal complaint against the defence lawyers and the three forensic experts who had written the report. No action was taken after an investigation so they again complained about the lack of inaction. Again it was found that the experts acted within the agreements of the court.
I think 6 and a half years later or 20 plus years more of teaching, other victims would have come forward. For now, this is NO serial abuser.
Richardson left legally due to lack of concrete evidence. She had not been asked for DNA samples due to the child’s interview and the type of assault she alleged she experienced.
Richardson, like many of us in IT was an early years teacher. Normal, respectful, high quality care in EY would mean teachers support children and would handle clothing, hold hands, occasionally need to support children by picking them up etc. children would be toilet trained but accidents happen. Touch DNA would almost be a certainty from the alleged crime scene. From an incident at home 3 days later? Not so sure. It is ‘fuzzy’ because it is not clear who has been eliminated by testing. In the latest court records it appears it is the claimant child and a profile that is similar? This has not always been clear.
The news says Richardson will not be extradited. There is no info about the actual judgement. Despite this, her team have attempted many times for her to be heard and she still has a right to a fair trial.
The UK currently has an agreement with Türkiye that all RPs must serve their sentence Yalvac prison.
I admire your dedication and support to survivors, but this is a forum for ITs and you yourself know that accusations happen to us all. People are innocent until proven guilty. I don’t believe for one second that Richardson is engaging in DARVO principles.