frogwell
Former Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,147
- Reaction score
- 3,006
I don't believe I ever read that before, about Spedding being on civil terms with one of the victims?
Perhaps it can be considered plausible deniability, in Margaret's situation. Perhaps not enough for charges to be laid against her, for intimidation of a victim/witness.
I still think that the points will be raised in the trial, however. They have made it into MSM, so they are considered serious enough to be considered. And the police evidently wanted people to know that. (And wanted Margaret to know that everyone now knew about it. More pressure.)
"In NSW, Threatening or Intimidating Victims or Witnesses carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment. Intimidation and threats to witnesses are seen most often in offences involving violence, particularly in domestic violence offences."
https://www.armstronglegal.com.au/criminal-law/offences/false-statements/threatening-witnesses
I will have to find the article, but it talks about the younger of the victims having a child of her own and him visiting and her becoming uncomfortable. I have always been under the impression that BS and MS have had an ongoing relationship with her. That is why he asked her for a statement during inqiries about him in the WT investigation. MS obviously sent her text after the historical allegations and who knows what her intent was. I agree, the police have put the most horrific account to the media for maximum pressure, even sharing unsubstantiated allegations and referring to them as evidence to be considered when at the time that is all they were. That is why there has been suspicion on my part as to the police motivation in this matter. MOO