JamieM wrote:No word of the brother but if that was case they would be charged also surely? A lot of rubbish. Ronnie isn't an angel and has been in bother before but she up routed his kids and he wasn't allowed to see them. The time he went and seen the kids he handed them winter coats and was no scene . One of her friends was the one being threatning
Are you not the brother? If not the brother you're extremely connected and extremely biased.
I'm his brother. Course I am biased but read the article it's her word against his. I also have a knowledge on what happened. He isn't innocent it was a bitter break up. Nothing more, nothing less. He moved on and all
Of a sudden this all came out woodwork. End of day 4.5 months goes and Ronnie has his life back. A lot of men on here will have been threw similar custody battles and will know how this works and been on the receiving end of similar things
JamieM wrote:A bitter ex girlfriends word against his. Jailed because he didn't want to be with her. Heard she's now casting for a role on emmerdale after her performance . I can't believe someone can be jailed for a nasty break up. World has gone insane
And who was the brother that messaged her?surely there would be evidence if this was done on social media?its just crazy to think they would send him down on very little, or no evidence. A bloody shame for him
Can he appeal?surely would have grounds
We all stepped in to try and help both them sort this out for the kids sakes.. Both of them were being silly at times.. I seen how vindictive this woman is first hand.. This is purely to make her life easier and too stop Ronnie from having any contact with the kids.. She was using the kids as bait to get some sick and twisted revenge and that's what she has clearly gotten.. We all tried to reason with her but this is what she wanted.. We even offered to do all pick ups and drop offs.. As a father who has been through the courts I know exactly how it feels and how much pain it causes not being able to see my son.. This is a woman who left her husband days after marriage to run away with Ronnie.. People really need to get the facts right before commenting.. Same woman who claimed her ex husband was abusive but was hinting to Ronnie he was to be around his kids.. Things get said in the heat of the argument when someone pushes your buttons especially when your kids are involved.. This is a joke he should of been warned about his behaviour and a date set for contact with the kids.. As for what a brother said I'm guessing that's been taken way out of context and none of us have had any communication from the police.. We always want what was in the kids best interest to see their mum and dad.. Sorry to put all this on yours Alba but I think people need to know the truth.. I'm not fully blaming her they are both as bad as each other but look at the conclusion. Shes not in jail
JamieM wrote:I don't expect to change minds etc and end of day he's been given a sentence which a lot of people will look at and say guilty. A trial that has been corrupt from the start. The whole article is based on what she has said with not one piece of evidence to prove their is any substance. Wherself standing in court and saying he's never once out a finger on her . He went down to see his kids which the mention and that's what the whole case is about . A man who is being prevented from any access to his kids. A previous court battle where Ronnie took his kids for 3 month after being prevented for 9 months but again was taken away from him. I don't know expect anyone to care but that's the facts . Anyone who knows Ronnie yeah he has a strong personality but he is a dedicated sportsman. Never drinks, never took a drug In his life. In gym all year and let this be a lesson to others that be careful what you do cause a women can ruin your life at any moment .
In a serious side women can often be really spiteful after a break up especially where kids are involved and they use the children as a weapon. Often the female will deliberate weaponise the children, turn them against the father, antagonise the father hoping he oversteps the line then call the old bill. It's hardly a new situation and most of us know of several decent men who have been dragged through this scenario.
JamieM wrote:A bitter ex girlfriends word against his. Jailed because he didn't want to be with her. Heard she's now casting for a role on emmerdale after her performance . I can't believe someone can be jailed for a nasty break up. World has gone insane
And who was the brother that messaged her?surely there would be evidence if this was done on social media?its just crazy to think they would send him down on very little, or no evidence. A bloody shame for him
Can he appeal?surely would have grounds
We all stepped in to try and help both them sort this out for the kids sakes.. Both of them were being silly at times.. I seen how vindictive this woman is first hand.. This is purely to make her life easier and too stop Ronnie from having any contact with the kids.. She was using the kids as bait to get some sick and twisted revenge and that's what she has clearly gotten.. We all tried to reason with her but this is what she wanted.. We even offered to do all pick ups and drop offs.. As a father who has been through the courts I know exactly how it feels and how much pain it causes not being able to see my son.. This is a woman who left her husband days after marriage to run away with Ronnie.. People really need to get the facts right before commenting.. Same woman who claimed her ex husband was abusive but was hinting to Ronnie he was to be around his kids.. Things get said in the heat of the argument when someone pushes your buttons especially when your kids are involved.. This is a joke he should of been warned about his behaviour and a date set for contact with the kids.. As for what a brother said I'm guessing that's been taken way out of context and none of us have had any communication from the police.. We always want what was in the kids best interest to see their mum and dad.. Sorry to put all this on yours Alba but I think people need to know the truth.. I'm not fully blaming her they are both as bad as each other but look at the conclusion. Shes not in jail
She sounds like a right c*nt but it didn't take a rocket scientist to see that, especially with her running off on her husband days after marriage to be with Ronnie. You'd think that would have turned him off. But no, he then goes and has kids with her.
That being said I do know how vindictive some women can be and using the kids as a weapon is the lowest of the low. But that's how pathetic some women are. Hard not to get drawn into their nonsense sometimes.
It does sound like a harsh sentence considering pedos often get cautions these days, as for the evidence, the texts threatening violence and the spyware must have been proved, they wouldn't take someone's word for that as evidence, not when forensics can track everything that has ever happened to a phone. If it's true she ran off with her husband to be with him straight away, alarm bells should have been ringing, once a pudendum ALWAYS a pudendum.
Is find my I phone spyware? If it is then guilty as charged. It was his phone which he bought when they were together with his details. They come on every phone he didn't install spyware lol
Totally unrelated, but I remember reading about a bloke who suspected his wife was having an affair, so he bought an iPhone with the 'Find my iPhone' thing switched on and hid it in her car boot. He then used it to trace her to wherever she was having the affair and chopped up his wife and her lover with an axe.
So I suppose it depends on the circumstances of what the software is used for.
I doubt I'd get a good price but id put money on it that he was logging in to it to see where she was.
The kids are the ones I feel sorry for. Not sure how they won't end up with some mental trauma as a result of it all. The girl is doing her part id imagine.
If it's a messy break up and it's tit for tat texts and arguments no way should Ronnie have been jailed
For that , happens all time , find my I phone is hardly spyware maybe he wanted to know where his kids where , and what guys where gonna be around them
? If she had a new guy on scene it's every parents fear
bigped wrote:If it's a messy break up and they it's tit for tat texts and arguments no way should Ronnie have been jailed
For that , happens all time , find my I phone is hardly spyware maybe he wanted to know where his kids where , and what guys where gonna be around them
? If she had a new guy on scene it's every parents fear
Boxerbeetle wrote:Totally unrelated, but I remember reading about a bloke who suspected his wife was having an affair, so he bought an iPhone with the 'Find my iPhone' thing switched on and hid it in her car boot. He then used it to trace her to wherever she was having the affair and chopped up his wife and her lover with an axe.
So I suppose it depends on the circumstances of what the software is used for.
bigped wrote:If it's a messy break up and they it's tit for tat texts and arguments no way should Ronnie have been jailed
For that , happens all time , find my I phone is hardly spyware maybe he wanted to know where his kids where , and what guys where gonna be around them
? If she had a new guy on scene it's every parents fear
Guy getting half naked and making kids
Watch porn while he plays with himself no doubt and walks from court ,
Worlds gone mad
This is spot on.
This. Yes. This whole world is going straight to hell. Things were much better in the old days. When the Krays ran the manor, you could leave your door unlocked, women could walk home safely with their shopping, never hear a swear word and young boys in shorts knew they had to run home early and not get into trouble, otherwise the brothers would teach them respect by forcibly sodomising them...
He can but not sure about of this is an option. Btw this was transferred from a normal court to a high court... seriously this was deemed as a high court case! Unfortunetly he has been made an example of because he's a boxer. I would understand the relevance of the headlines if he had boxed her but he didn't lay a finger on the girl. Spoke to him and told him a few of the comments on here and he especially liked the judges scorecards comments. He then replied he hopes me and Daviddee set you guys straight haha.
Boxerbeetle wrote:Totally unrelated, but I remember reading about a bloke who suspected his wife was having an affair, so he bought an iPhone with the 'Find my iPhone' thing switched on and hid it in her car boot. He then used it to trace her to wherever she was having the affair and chopped up his wife and her lover with an axe.
So I suppose it depends on the circumstances of what the software is used for.
You can never beat a woman at this kind of vindictive game. Best thing you can do is recognize these types and steer clear. Say what you want but they are pros. It's like a novice weightlifter going up against an Olympic powerlifting champion. You haven't got a prayer. This is their game to a T. Doesn't help that the courts are all pro women. I wouldn't say Ronnie did himself the best of favors all round but you could put muhatma gandy up against your average woman in these situations and I can guarantee he will lose the plot and get time.
Rather than quoting everyone one by one, I'll put all of this in one post.
A number of issues have been raised in relation to evidence, representation, appeals, the English Court system and so on, deal with this sort of stuff on a day to day basis so I can answer some of it without knowing the finer details of the case.
First of all, the evidence can't be judged on the article, same goes for the reporting of any criminal case, far more goes on that what is reported. Her word is evidence if she provided a statement, the accuracy of it can be disputed, but it is evidence. Just because he hasn't physically harmed her doesn't mean he hasn't committed an offence, the article isn't clear on the exact charges he was convicted of but it makes mention of Threats To Kill, which I presume were dropped, possibly Harassment and it would fall under the new offences mentioned. If it's true that he was following her movements and that could be proved, then he was up against it from the start because it is difficult to argue that in doing so he was being reasonable or acting in her best interests.
The issues with the children do not constitute a defence, while it might not be right what has gone on there, that is for the Family Courts to decide, before a criminal Court they are only useful for mitigation.
In terms of the sentence, it's based on the sentencing guidelines, how closely they're followed depends on the Judge, but the range is from a Community Order up to 4 years, without seeing the exact evidence it's hard to say whether it was excessive or not, from the limited facts I'd guess he was sentenced on Cat 2A, starting point 12 months, range of 6 months-2 years.
While he had to use a Solicitor practising in English law, he didn't have to use the one given to him, at some point down the line, either at the Police Station or the Magistrates Court, he will have asked for the Duty Solicitor, until they get a signed Legal Aid declaration from you and get a Rep Order granted, you can change firms with a simple authority that's a couple of lines long.
The evidence for the spyware may well have come from examining the phones, both Ronnie's and her's. If they found spyware on her phone and evidence on his that he was accessing it then that's pretty hard to dispute, but stuff like that isn't usually reported in any real detail.
He may well be out before 4 1/2 months, if he's in Dundee and she's in Northallerton then the distance should make him a good candidate for HDC, either way as long as he doesn't do anything stupid inside he'll be out before Christmas and in an open prison in a couple of months.
If there was anything in that from one of the brothers they should have been prosecuted too, likely they weren't because it's probably bullshit and for a small case it's not really worth dealing with the cross border issues.
I don't think find my iPhone could be classed as spyware that he installed given that it comes standard, although using it to track her movements and read messages would be illegal, possible appeal point on sentence though?
"Can he appeal" - Possibly. He'll find it difficult to appeal the conviction now, which is actually fairly simple and just involves filling in some forms with a couple of appeal points and submitting them to the Magistrates Court, but you have 21 days and he's probably gone over that now, appealing out of time isn't easy. Appealing the sentence is possible, he'll have until the 14th August to submit it, but to do so he'll need a positive advice on Appeal from his Barrister, while the sentence may be harsh to appeal you have to be able to show that it's manifestly excessive.
Looking at the articles and doing a bit of research, it looks like Amrit Jandoo who represented him, was only called to the Bar in March, but had practised as a Solicitor since 2009, working for the firm that I would guess represented Ronnie, Clark Willis, if you're not sure I'll check tomorrow. There's nothing dodgy about that, fairly normal if a Solicitor transfers to the Bar on good terms with their old firm that they'll then pass them a few jobs to help them get going. The important thing is to get the advice on Appeal from him, chase them up for it ASAP, the quicker you get it the better and a bit of pressure tends to help because normally Barrister's aren't really in a rush. If it comes back positive then great, they'll bang it into the Court of Appeal and it goes from there, if it's negative then either you leave it at that, or pay privately for another Barrister to look at the papers and provide an advice, hoping that it's positive. Make sure you get that advice though because without it any Appeal won't get anywhere.
In terms of the transfer from a normal Court to a High Court and the seriousness of the case, I don't know exactly how the Scottish Court system works and what goes up to the High Court but in England it's very different. There's three types of offences, Summary, Either Way and Indictable cases. Summary offences can only be heard in the Magistrates Court, Either Way can be in the Mags or Crown and Indictable will be sent to the Crown Court. Ronnie was tried on an Either Way offence, the Magistrates had deemed it suitable for Summary trial and he didn't elect Crown Court trial. After being found guilty the Magistrates then decided that their sentencing powers (6 month maximum), were not sufficient and committed it to the Crown Court for Sentence. The difference between the two countries is that all sorts can end up in the Crown Court, Affray, S4 Public Order, low value Fraud, etc, I've even seen a bit of shoplifting in the Crown Court, charged as a Conspiracy to Steal!
I hope all goes well for Ronnie, if he can stick an Appeal in then go for it, he's got nothing to lose taking it to the single Judge and may well have been unfortunate, Trial before the Magistrates can be hit and miss, especially if you get the wrong one because some of them make their minds up beforehand, go with the word of one over the other without taking anything else into account or even understand what they can and can't do, like bailing someone with the condition "Not to enter England, save to attend Court or a pre-arranged appointment with Solicitors". Probably would have been better off getting a jury involved, but it's too late for that now.
Hope that's answered a few questions, if anyone has anymore then either ask me here or PM.
