future relationships & a police caution

onetomany

bling like you said you wouldnt have got your child, please stop beating yourself up about this sounds like your x was a !!!!!, if i was you i would just try to forget it and move on with your live, happy new year!!!!!!!!!!1

AnnieM_3

Errata wrote: »

Why would that be ????

Sorry, I may have been a little flippant - I'm just very angry - Bestpud thinks I'd be biased towards the accused (or not sympathetic to the alleged victim) if I was on a jury in a DV case, because I got angry with people posting about the OP obviously being guilty, when clearly we don't have all the facts. I am now absolutely furious (can you tell?!)

bestpud

AnnieM wrote: »

Excuse me?????? How dare you say a thing like that!

All I am advocating is objectivity. Until all the facts have been disclosed and presented nobody can make a judgement. If I was on a jury in a DV case I would listen to the defence and the prosecution and then try to make an informed, objective decision, which is exactly what a jury has to do, always bearing in mind that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution.

You are really out of order with your comment. You know absolutely nothing about me, what my opinion is on DV or violence against women in general, or whether I have any experience of it - personal or via friends/family. I think you should apologise for what you said.

And you know nothing of my situation, of course.

I was not the one reading between the lines. I was actually taking the OPs words and questioning them, as a court would.

You were surmising about possible reasons behind the words - I was looking objectively at what is written in front of us (the facts as they stood at that point in time). I believe ONW was doing the same and hence my comment, because I believe your response to her was out of order too.

Now we have further explanation but to begin with we only had what we could see to go on.

The comments I made about DV perpetrators often justifying, or not believing they are guilty, are actually true, as you will know if you have experience of this.

So, no, I won't be apologising for my comment. I believe it is just as wrong to decide the OP was innocent despite some questionable lines in his post, as it is to decide he is guilty.

You will note I sat on the line in my reply (suggesting possible outcomes for each scenario) to him and asked for further explanation.

If I were on a jury I would take what was said and work with that - I would not surmise about possible reasons behind those words as that is not a juror's role, and encourages a personal judgement.

bestpud

AnnieM wrote: »

Sorry, I may have been a little flippant - I'm just very angry - Bestpud thinks I'd be biased towards the accused (or not sympathetic to the alleged victim) if I was on a jury in a DV case, because I got angry with people posting about the OP obviously being guilty, when clearly we don't have all the facts. I am now absolutely furious (can you tell?!)

May I suggest you take a deep breath?

blingboy

onetomany wrote: »

bling like you said you wouldnt have got your child, please stop beating yourself up about this sounds like your x was a !!!!!, if i was you i would just try to forget it and move on with your live, happy new year!!!!!!!!!!1

Yes thank You.

I cant see there is much else i can do - cry and dream of a family i can provide and love or actually try and make one with my lady friend.

I am not the type of guy to keep such matters a secret, as i would certainly want to know a gf past on such matters. I agree such honesty works both ways. And as i have said i am prepared to let a gf read the papers and make her own judgment.
Since this event and separating from my partner, my life has moved on loads. I have lots of fun with my child and am so grateful for being involved in their life each day (something my ex did try to stop for a few months before she got the house money).
anyway the comments on this forum have been useful, thanks.

Pinkmexican - thanks for the tip re: visiting the US - did not realise it may need to be declared.

bestpud

Thank you for the further explanation blingboy.

So, if she left anyway, taking the money she wanted, and leaving you all behind, why did she need to lie? She could have emptied the bank accounts and walked out without you and your child without doing all that, couldn't she?

I have no idea whether you are innocent or not but, a DV victim may well be afraid enough to leave a child and/or not fight the ex for them, so I'm not convinced that proves innocence tbh.

Plus a family court acts in the interests of the child and you could be a fabulous dad but rubbish partner iyswim?

Are you saying you were not made fully aware of the implications in accepting a caution? And, if there was no evidence at all, why not let it go to court? The cost would have surely denied her some of the money she hoped to gain anyway? I may be wrong on that last point - but the less you have, the less she can take, surely?

In answer to your OP, I think you should be entirely honest about what happened and take it from there. It would be awful if things were working out fine and the relationship broke down purely because you'd lied.

I know I'd want to be aware about something like this. The people who say their partners have history and they accept it, all actually know about it so they have weighed up the pros and cons and decided to stick with the men. DV is different though, I know, but it shows there are second chances.

You may want to think about how to tell them this though. In some ways I think it helps that your child is with you, as it is unusual and gives an opening point to your history iyswim?

ETA: I am making no judgement with the above questions, but if I have asked them, it is possible future partners will too.

AnnieM_3

bestpud wrote: »

And you know nothing of my situation, of course.

I was not the one reading between the lines. I was actually taking the OPs words and questioning them, as a court would.

You were surmising about possible reasons behind the words - I was looking objectively at what is written in front of us (the facts as they stood at that point in time). I believe ONW was doing the same and hence my comment, because I believe your response to her was out of order too.

Now we have further explanation but to begin with we only had what we could see to go on.

The comments I made about DV perpetrators often justifying, or not believing they are guilty, are actually true, as you will know if you have experience of this.

So, no, I won't be apologising for my comment. I believe it is just as wrong to decide the OP was innocent despite some questionable lines in his post, as it is to decide he is guilty.

You will note I sat on the line in my reply (suggesting possible outcomes for each scenario) to him and asked for further explanation.

If I were on a jury I would take what was said and work with that - I would not surmise about possible reasons behind those words as that is not a juror's role, and encourages a personal judgement.

You have not 'got' what I was trying to say, I'm afraid.

I was simply trying to put across an alternative version. I was kind of playing Devil's advocate, to illustrate why we should be objective. Basically, I was saying if we don't have all the facts we can't just assume guilt. I am angry that you seem to think I am assuming the OP was completely innocent. I wasn't. I don't think you read my posts properly, or maybe I didn't make it 100% clear what I was getting at.

I felt ONW was out of order for posting that his next gf will find out 'WHEN HE STARTS KNOCKING HER ABOUT'. He wasn't asking to be put on trial in here, hence I admonished ONW for trying to read into his words, when you could just as easily conclude the opposite (which is what I was trying to demonstrate when I put forward alternative suggestions as to what they could mean)! I would hope a jury member would be objective, and I don't feel ONW's 'no smoke without fire' attitude was one you would hope to see from a jury-member.

Where did I say you weren't being objective? You obviously were trying to put forward suggestions for how he should proceed whether he was guilty or not!

If I were on a jury I would take what was said and work with that - I would not surmise about possible reasons behind those words as that is not a juror's role, and encourages a personal judgement

MY POINT EXACTLY!

The reason I feel you should apologise is that you have basically suggested I would not be sympathetic to a DV victim as a jury member. That was extremely offensive. I hope that clears it up.

AnnieM_3

bestpud wrote: »

May I suggest you take a deep breath?

You have really upset me with your comment.

bestpud

AnnieM wrote: »

You have not 'got' what I was trying to say, I'm afraid.

I was simply trying to put across an alternative version. I was kind of playing Devil's advocate, to illustrate why we should be objective. Basically, I was saying if we don't have all the facts we can't just assume guilt. I am angry that you seem to think I am assuming the OP was completely innocent. I wasn't. I don't think you read my posts properly, or maybe I didn't make it 100% clear what I was getting at.

I felt ONW was out of order for posting that his next gf will find out 'WHEN HE STARTS KNOCKING HER ABOUT'. He wasn't asking to be put on trial in here, hence I admonished ONW for trying to read into his words, when you could just as easily conclude the opposite (which is what I was trying to demonstrate when I put forward alternative suggestions as to what they could mean)! I would hope a jury member would be objective, and I don't feel ONW's 'no smoke without fire' attitude was one you would hope to see from a jury-member.

Where did I say you weren't being objective? You obviously were trying to put forward suggestions for how he should proceed whether he was guilty or not!

MY POINT EXACTLY!

The reason I feel you should apologise is that you have basically suggested I would not be sympathetic to a DV victim as a jury member. That was extremely offensive. I hope that clears it up.

If the OP was guilty and did not tell a future partner beforehand, then they would likely find out when she started knocking her about.

It was in response to a suggestion he should keep quiet, and remember, at this point, we only had the information from the OP, and that had some glaringly obvious gaps.

I think it entirely appropriate to point out where that advice could lead.

When you said you hoped ONW was never a juror, you were replying to a later post anyway, not the above.

But anyway, I repeat, I was acting on the words given in the post and not surmising about possible thoughts behind them. Some of it is still questionable imo.

I say all that with sympathy for the OP if he is innocent, but also with the very real impact of DV in mind.

I did not mean to upset you and was merely taking a point made by you, to another poster on here, and turning it on it's head.

Sometimes, if you post emotive comments, you will get them reflected back at you, and if you are sensitive, it is perhaps better to keep 'personal' comments like that out of your posts?

Seems we agree on the main point anyway.

I will leave it there as you are clearly getting emotionally involved here and I have no wish to make this personal.

AnnieM_3

bestpud wrote: »

If the OP was guilty and did not tell a future partner beforehand, then they would likely find out when she started knocking her about. Very true, but that wasn't how it was worded, which was what narked me! :rolleyes:

It was in response to a suggestion he should keep quiet, and remember, at this point, we only had the information from the OP, and that had some glaringly obvious gaps.
Fair point.

I think it entirely appropriate to point out where that advice could lead.
I agree.

When you said you hoped ONW was never a juror, you were replying to a later post anyway, not the above.
Umm.. I was, actually, but sorry if I didn't make that clear. When I said previous I should have perhaps been more specific.

But anyway, I repeat, I was acting on the words given in the post and not surmising about possible thoughts behind them. Some of it is still questionable imo.
I wasn't questioning your comments. I actually think you were being quite even-handed.

I say all that with sympathy for the OP if he is innocent, but also with the very real impact of DV in mind.
Absolutely. I think your advice to him has been quite correct.

I did not mean to upset you and was merely taking a point made by you, to another poster on here, and turning it on it's head.
Ok.

Sometimes, if you post emotive comments, you will get them reflected back at you, and if you are sensitive, it is perhaps better to keep 'personal' comments like that out of your posts?
I don't really think it's 'sensitive' to be offended at someone saying you wouldn't be sympathetic to someone who has been beaten up (or worse) by their OH, but there you go. If ONW is offended by what I said, then I am sorry to her. I just felt her post was not in the best of taste, and made her seem quick to judge and condemn. I didn't feel my comment justified you implying I was sympathetic to wife-beaters.

Seems we agree on the main point anyway.
:beer:

I will leave it there as you are clearly getting emotionally involved here and I have no wish to make this personal.
Likewise.

I hope the OP decides to tell this lady what has happened, so she can make her own mind up about him and any possible future they might have together.

AnnieM x