Jeremy Forrest: Schoolgirl Speaks Of 'Crush'

There is more to this than meets the eye.  What are we not being told about her mother and his wife?
Probably best if we aren't told, but it isn't difficult to read between the lines.  She said herself that she didn't feel safe at home.  And his family aren't very keen on his wife.

Wierd, isn't it? Her dad sounds down to earth and sensible, his family sound thoroughly decent and normal - and understanding.

Agree, there's something we're not hearing, especially about her mother. It would be interesting to see just what she's been saying to the police, her version seems to fall rather short of reality.

I would like to see a good criminal lawyer take this on pro bono; something just isn't right about any of this, not least the chicanery with the EAW.

Was there an EAW?  Not that it matters all that much.  Jeremy Forrest could have contested it, and remained in France until a French Court decided if there was a case to answer, which as far as I could see, there wasn't, in France.  so he probably wouldn't have been extradited, unless a French Court thought that there was something iffy about the abduction, like he had forced her to go with him.
Pity he didn't stay here, and then she could have joined him when she was sixteen.

Yes, there was an EAW, Sabot, it's somewhere in the depths of the reports.

The UK couldn't do anything about them being in France as things stood, as they were breaking no French laws.

Enter her mother with her tale of 'abduction', which France had to act on. That was what he was charged with, and what everyone thought was the only charge.

But, after he was found guilty of that, the 'sex' charges came along. Now, he only got a year for the abduction, and should have been released due to time served. The other charge, to which he pled guilty, earned him another 4+ years to be served consecutively, which is almost unheard of.

Which is why, IMO, the whole thing stinks.

And now we have the farce over not naming the 'victim'.

As Ms X doesn't regard herself as a 'victim', and has been merrily naming herself all over the social media, the DPP had better start by charging her...

Consecutively?  I missed that.  They really did go for the jugular, didn't they.  So about four and a half years to serve, which means her should be out in under two years.  Unless they want to stop him marrying a consenting adult.  Can't wait for her book.  The Law has played right into their hands, and he will come out of it a hero.  Those two will probably live in luxury for the rest of their lives.
And The Law, as usual, is seen to be an ass as she tweets her name all over The Internet, and no one can do a thing about it.

I have little doubt that long-term, they are set for life, Sabot - daytime telly, reality TV, weddings paid for by OK!, maybe a TV movie....

I don't like legal shenanigans, though, it brings the whole system into disrepute. I suspect her mother is at the back of that - how DARE she be issuing 'victim statements' when she wasn't the victim, and the supposed 'victim' wants nothing to do with her?

Anyway, judging from the letter to his family, Ms X's command of the English language seems to have come along nicely since she started paying attention at school, instead of being swamped by her mother's boyfriends and babies.

She probably couldn't live with her real father as he's a lorry driver and perhaps away from home a lot; it rather says it all that she's living with a stepfather and his family.

Ms X seems to be very mature for her years, and Forrest rather immature; they may well turn out to be a very good match, as they both seem to need stability?

The Press and The Law are encouraging them both to stick with it.  The Press only care about what's in it for them.  But The Law is a disgrace, if only in spreading the sex life of a fifteen year old for everyone to read.  And some of that seems to be in serious doubt anyway.  But no doubt her book will put that right.

Why didn't the court listen to what the 'victim' was saying, instead of treating her like some kind of chattel of her mother? It made a nonsense of all that guff about 'giving victims a voice'.

Ms X found her voice, all right, and has been using it all over the social media. Is the prosecutor going to have her arrested for NOT wanting to be anonymous, and not sticking to whatever he thought the script was going to be?

Is it Legal to arrest a Minor and force her to give evidence if she doesn't want to?  What were they going to do to her if she had persisted in refusing?  Send her to prison for Contempt of Court?
What a farce.  But all grist for the mill of her book.

I would be asking some serious questions if I was her.

Seen this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346602/Jeremy-Forrests-sister-reveals-disturbing-plans-wed-pupil-snatched-leaves-prison.html

The detective who led the Jeremy Forrest investigation had previously been suspended from his job for sending out racist and sexually explicit text messages to his colleagues.
Detective Chief Inspector Mark Ling, who was placed in charge of the inquiry last September when Forrest and the schoolgirl fled to France, was singled out for praise by the girl’s mother for his ‘commitment and dedication’ to the investigation.
However, in 2011, while he was District Commander in Hastings, Ling was accused of sending a racist joke by text to colleagues about the model Katie Price’s disabled son, Harvey.
He also allegedly sent an explicit version of the nursery rhyme Little Miss Muffet from his work BlackBerry.
Another, it was reported at the time, featured a song, ‘The Twelve Days of Christmas – Hastings Style’, mocking the town where he grew up and had been District Commander since 2008.
The texts – particularly the one about Harvey, 11, who is blind and autistic and has difficulty walking – were brought to the attention of Sussex Police. Ling was suspended for six months and found guilty of gross misconduct.
He was give a final warning and redeployed to a ‘crime management’ role in Eastbourne.

After the Forrest trial ended last week, he said of the teacher: ‘He was in a position of responsibility, authority and trust over his children in his care, something parents and the wider community expect to be upheld at all costs.’
Sussex Police confirmed Ling was disciplined in 2011, but said he has been commended for his work on the Forrest case.

The Mail seems to be changing its stance rather rapidly, perhaps after getting such a battering from readers.

And the lead detective sounds like an absolute pig.

My friends, this was taken from Sky News:

http://news.sky.com/story/1106611/jeremy-forrest-child-sex-teacher-jailed

Interesting to see that he wasn't handcuffed while leaving France.

You know, few girls of Ms X's age know their own minds; many a good few years older still don't - her mother, for one, I suspect.

Miss X has stood up to her mother, the police, the prosecutor, who had to have her arrested, the courts, everyone, and far from wanting to be an 'anonymous victim' has been all over the social media being very UN-anonymous and definitely not a victim.

She's also had her sex life plastered all over the papers, and it hasn't stopped her protesting. Isn't it time someone listened to her? Instead of treating her like a mindless child who was her mother's property?

http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/the-nspcc-suppressing-the-truth/#comments

Thank God! I was starting to think we were the only people who hadn't gone totally mad.

Well, apart from 10,000+ Mail readers who rained on the Wail's parade by refusing to rant incoherently about 'peados' [sic] and couldn't actually see what the fuss was about.

I fear this tale may be a graphic own goal for the NSPCC. Just wait ’til OK magazine get hold of the exclusive rights to the wedding pictures. Who will be the first wedding gown manufacturer to offer Mega their ‘top of the range’ Princess gown for her special day? An interview on Oprah Winfrey with all expenses paid?

Yup; this could go on for years. Meanwhile, taxpayers' money is being spent on HMP chaperoning the pair of them, now the very vocal non-victim can do pretty much as she pleases.

'Don't call my brother a paedophile. She was 15, not 11,' says Jeremy Forrest's sister as she claims teacher asked her to look after his victim as his wife begins divorce proceedings


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2347879/My-brother-paedophile-loves-girl-abducted-Jeremy-Forrests-sister-says-family-support-couple-asked-looked-jailed.html#ixzz2XDpx2y3g
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

His sister starts the ball rolling on the daytime telly circuit. I have to say, his family seem very sensible and realistic.

His family are supporting him and Ms. Mega Stutter.  Which is more than can be said for her mother who is showing a complete lack of dignity, unlike her daughter.
Her mother must know how she feels, so you might wonder why her mother didn't keep her mouth shut.

Yes, her mother's conduct was a textbook example of how to turn a family problem into an international mega-crisis.

As for her mother's damned 'victim statement' - incredible! The supposed 'adults' did everything, all along the line, that was guaranteed to drive Mega-stutter into the arms of her beloved. What did they think was going to happen - that they would be able to bully her into doing as they, not she, wanted?

No doubt he will be moved to a Class C prison shortly, maybe a nice old Elizabethan manor, with stables, such as Mrs Huhne was in - again, circumstances absolutely guaranteed to make young(ish) love bloom.

And OK! will pay for the wedding.....

I think I somewhat missed the point initially, of the mother's "Victim Statement". At what point in time was she ever the victim?
The actual "Victim" made her feelings quite clear. She doesn't at all see herself as any such thing.  So what legal right did her mother have to take on the roll? Especially as the actual "Victim" is now over the age of consent. and perfectly able to speak for herself.
What a farce.

The contrast between the sentence handed down to Stuart Hall and that for Forrest is quite extraordinary. 

In Hall's case, the sentence could have been between 2 and 5 years, so 15 months was in effect a minimum.

One point to note is that by pleading guilty to the sexual offences, this will prvent the police from pursuing them further, and will therefore bring an element of closure.  Had the simply been sentenced for the "abduction" (sic), then it is quite likely that on his release he would have been rearrested and held on remand for an extended period while that was investigated.   He would also have a discount for pleading guilty, so it was probably calculated but a sensibe move.

The sentences being consecutive is extremely rare and excessivley harsh, in my view. 

It would appear that the authorities were out to make an example of someone.  I agree that the backlash will be interesting.

He was extremely foolish, must have been aware of the risks, but......

He's undeniably an idiot, J-P, but the whole thing reminds me of that old business of the Stones and breaking butterflies on wheels.

These people calling him a 'paedophile' really do need to look at a dictionary. They don't seem to know what the word means....not to mention the small detail that Mega-stutter is all over google, and looks considerably older than 15/16.

Unless it is now PC to regard 20-year-old women as 'children'?

Comment on-

http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/the-nspcc-suppressing-the-truth/#comments

Given that there are around 8,000 births to under-17 mothers (meaning sex took place when they were under 16) it’s baffling how the NSPCC is not more involved with their local family planning services to get to the bottom of this modern plague.

Quite.

What on earth? Is there no end to the vindictiveness of the police and DPP?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/woman-arrested-on-suspicion-of-helping-school-teacher-jeremy-forrest-coach-his-victim-for-trial-8677065.html

Woman arrested on suspicion of helping school teacher Jeremy Forrest coach his victim for trial
Jeremy Forrest has been sentenced to five-and-a-half years in prison for abducting his pupil to France

If ever people needed high-powered lawyers, it's the Forrests and Mega-speech impediment. This is little more than a vendetta against them, IMO.

The Police did cock things up somewhat, and were possibly partly responsible for them absconding. This won't have gone down well as they don't like being made fools of.
But what she said under great stress after she was forced back to England was never going to be what she felt once she knew he was alright.

In my opinion they will have a job proving anything.

It's the viciousness that gets me, Sabot. The script didn't play out as planned, the 'victim' refused to be either silent or a victim, and someone is out for revenge.

I really would like to see a high-powered lawyer take this one on pro bono.

And on and on it goes:

Twitter users who named Jeremy Forrest's victim after his conviction 'could have broken the law'
Twitter users named the disgraced teacher's victim, who was 15 at the time
As a child and a sexual offence victim she has legal anonymity
Police are investigating whether the identifying tweets are a criminal offence


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2350034/Twitter-users-named-Jeremy-Forrests-victim-conviction-broken-law.html#ixzz2XVesoORW
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

First person they will need to arrest is the 'victim', then, as she was merrily naming herself last week.

Seriously, what is it with this case? Did some prosecutor think it was going to be his stepping stone to great things in the 'abuse industry'?