UK - Man accused of kidnap and sexual assault of girl aged 9 in Knightsbridge, London

[Dotta]

Wow!
What a mess!

I guess he cannot be tried again on SA of a child as he was declared not guilty by Jury.

But maybe this new charge will be treated as new evidence?

That a victim was not believed is very sad.

JMO

 

[Lucy6226]

Hmmm if this man wasn't a captain in the air force would the verdict be the same?? You would hope this hadn't influenced the jury but I'm not so sure in this case.

I am aware children can be easily led with leading questions, this is especially easy to do unwittingly from family members trying to assertain the details. But children can not usually maintain retelling the circumstances of an event with consistency if it there are any untruths involved.

Always believe the child, because adults lie about these things far more than children imo/ime.

 

[Lucy6226]

Wow!
What a mess!

I guess he cannot be tried again on SA of a child as he was declared not guilty by Jury.

But maybe this new charge will be treated as new evidence?

That a victim was not believed is very sad.

JMO

If the images are of the kidnap victim then surely he can be tried again under new evidence.

 

[Dotta]

Hmmm if this man wasn't a captain in the air force would the verdict be the same?? You would hope this hadn't influenced the jury but I'm not so sure in this case.

I am aware children can be easily led with leading questions, this is especially easy to do unwittingly from family members trying to assertain the details. But children can not usually maintain retelling the circumstances of an event with consistency if it there are any untruths involved.

Always believe the child, because adults lie about these things far more than children imo/ime.

I don't believe in any "leading questions".

C'mon!
Questioning is done by professionals, by psychologists.
They know their job.
There are procedures concerning questioning children.

This is really frightening how a child victim was treated, not believed.

No wonder,
victims of SA are reluctant to report the crime.

What a shame!

JMO

 

[Skigh]

Hmmm if this man wasn't a captain in the air force would the verdict be the same?? You would hope this hadn't influenced the jury but I'm not so sure in this case.

I am aware children can be easily led with leading questions, this is especially easy to do unwittingly from family members trying to assertain the details. But children can not usually maintain retelling the circumstances of an event with consistency if it there are any untruths involved.

Always believe the child, because adults lie about these things far more than children imo/ime.

The very fact that he did not take her straight into Harrods should have caused the jury to acknowledge his motives were suspicious. To give him not guilty verdicts on all counts is extremely worrying.

 

[Bluebear15]

I hope the child is seeing a therapist, because i worry that she will go through life not trusting anyone. I wouldn't blame her... the jury have just told her that she's lying. Imo, she's not.

 

[Kittypoo]

The very fact that he did not take her straight into Harrods should have caused the jury to acknowledge his motives were suspicious. To give him not guilty verdicts on all counts is extremely worrying.

I’m thinking in his position he could afford a top defence lawyer and maybe the prosecution was weak in comparison. Agree extremely worrying
Just my thoughts

 

[jepop]

If the images are of the kidnap victim then surely he can be tried again under new evidence.

I think if images were of the child victim they would have been used by the prosecution during trial? Unless of course they were discovered too late to enter into evidence. I guess moo this parallel investigation into him possessing CS images wasn't allowed to be raised cos 'prejudicial'. What BS imo.

The jury got this one wrong by believing the defendant credible but somehow not believing the little girl. I never followed reporting of the trial, but does anyone know if his defence actually entered evidence or some sort of expert testimony for the intent of discrediting the child?. I really hope not. Or did the poor little girl testify on closed circuit or her interview with police was played? I guess strictly speaking jury could not decide guilt BARD with what they had but just wow.

I hope the girl is getting lots of support and knows that her parents are proud if her and that despite the verdict she is a good girl and the man is a bad man and this is not her fault!! Moo

 

[Lucy6226]

I don't believe in any "leading questions".

C'mon!
Questioning is done by professionals, by psychologists.
They know their job.
There are procedures concerning questioning children.

This is really frightening how a child victim was treated, not believed.

No wonder,
victims of SA are reluctant to report the crime.

What a shame!

JMO

Unfortunately leading questions can be asked even by professionals, usually unknowingly and innocently.

Achieving Best Evidence (ABE) training is available but is very expensive and in my local authority only runs once or twice a year. For example in a team of 40 Social Workers it is common for only 2-3 to be trained. Obviously they are trained in counselling skills, asking open ended questions. But ascertaining the views of a child and gathering court evidence are very different things.

Something in this case went very wrong regarding the evidence, either physical or concerning evidence from the child. If not he clearly would have been found guilty.

I hope the child is receiving therapy and knows despite what the jury decided that she is believed.

 

[GRT]

MOO of course, but pretty safe to say it's the defendent who was arrested following the verdict. Wonder how the jury feel learning this?

I tend to agree. This BBC story says the man who was arrested Tuesday was 57. I believe Prussak is also 57, or was at least when he was first arrested.

I'm thinking (JMOO) that law enforcement was waiting in the wings to charge him should he be found not-guilty of the first charges.

All MOO

 

[Dpdan]

I’m thinking in his position he could afford a top defence lawyer and maybe the prosecution was weak in comparison. Agree extremely worrying
Just my thoughts

I'm not sure he's in a good position if he's of no fixed address. What's he doing in UK anyway? If he's been in the country since at least April that's over the 6 months for a tourist. If he's on a work visa why would he not have a permanent address?

 

[Lucy6226]

I'm not sure he's in a good position if he's of no fixed address. What's he doing in UK anyway? If he's been in the country since at least April that's over the 6 months for a tourist. If he's on a work visa why would he not have a permanent address?

He might have been based at an American airbase in the UK....and as such lost his accomodation there, hence NFA. Just a thought, no idea if this is/was the case

 

[Dpdan]

He might have been based at an American airbase in the UK....and as such lost his accomodation there, hence NFA. Just a thought, no idea if this is/was the case

His Linked in shows he left USAF 10 years ago, has had other jobs since but no current role listed.

 

[PoirotPink]

I'm confused about the Benadryl. UK has Benadryl but it doesn't have diphenhydramine as the active ingredient in antihistamines. You can buy diphenhydramine as a sleep aid, but not Benadryl brand. I suppose it could have been obtained elsewhere, but if he was asked if he gave Benadryl when it was diphenhydramine which was found in her urine, that wasn't the right question to ask.

He's from the US. He was only in Britain for a job interview, I believe.

 

[Indy_ar]

I tend to agree. This BBC story says the man who was arrested Tuesday was 57. I believe Prussak is also 57, or was at least when he was first arrested.

I'm thinking (JMOO) that law enforcement was waiting in the wings to charge him should he be found not-guilty of the first charges.

All MOO

The man arrested per this BBC article is Robert Prussak Man, 57, charged with child sex offences

 

[PoirotPink]

Hmmm if this man wasn't a captain in the air force would the verdict be the same?? You would hope this hadn't influenced the jury but I'm not so sure in this case.

I am aware children can be easily led with leading questions, this is especially easy to do unwittingly from family members trying to assertain the details. But children can not usually maintain retelling the circumstances of an event with consistency if it there are any untruths involved.

Always believe the child, because adults lie about these things far more than children imo/ime.

I posted some links earlier in this thread. The girl's account of what happened was credible and consistent with the route they took. There was no DNA evidence in this case (not even sure how or why they could take samples given the nature of assault) and it seems the jury attributed some importance to this. JMO.

 

[PoirotPink]

I've checked some sources for his middle name and believe this is the same guy...

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/wa-court-of-appeals/115212454.html

(If anyone's interested in his ex-wife's assessment of his character.)

I now think there was a reason they stayed in his apartment for two hours. IMO, it's possible she wasn't watching cartoons and had been effectively drugged, wih no memory of it. JMO.

JMO

 

[PoirotPink]

I’m thinking in his position he could afford a top defence lawyer and maybe the prosecution was weak in comparison. Agree extremely worrying
Just my thoughts

The jury asked if there was any DNA evidence after an hour of deliberations. They were told there was not. It seems they may have given this more significance than was warranted. With the nature of the assault, in the park, I don't think it was even possible to take DNA swabs that would be likely to prove anything. However, the prosecution obviously didn't have the chance to address why DNA evidence wasn't taken. JMO.

 

[PoirotPink]

I think if images were of the child victim they would have been used by the prosecution during trial? Unless of course they were discovered too late to enter into evidence. I guess moo this parallel investigation into him possessing CS images wasn't allowed to be raised cos 'prejudicial'. What BS imo.

The jury got this one wrong by believing the defendant credible but somehow not believing the little girl. I never followed reporting of the trial, but does anyone know if his defence actually entered evidence or some sort of expert testimony for the intent of discrediting the child?. I really hope not. Or did the poor little girl testify on closed circuit or her interview with police was played? I guess strictly speaking jury could not decide guilt BARD with what they had but just wow.

I hope the girl is getting lots of support and knows that her parents are proud if her and that despite the verdict she is a good girl and the man is a bad man and this is not her fault!! Moo

He was arrested after the trial. If the police knew beforehand, I believe they could still arrest and charge him but there would be reporting restrictions in place until the first trial was over (providing the girl was not the subject of the images). If the girl was the subject in the images, the prosecution could justifiably apply to have that evidence introduced as soon as it became available.

It might be that someone who knows him saw the news reports on this case and reported him to police with their suspicions. I think he was initially arrested on "suspicion" and not "possession".

 

[GRT]

The man arrested per this BBC article is Robert Prussak Man, 57, charged with child sex offences

Yes, that was the original man. But, he was found not guilty. Then, at the bottom of that story they mention that a 57 year old man (name withheld) was arrested after that on suspicion of child images.

But, it has to be the same guy we're all thinking.