Muliaina Arrested

[austingtir]

Charges have been dropped for a lack of evidence.

Apparently the original claim was for touching a 19 year olds bottom in a nightclub.

Don't get me wrong - any unwanted sexual contact isn't cool. But it seems a very extreme reaction (arresting him and dragging him out of a stadium with media attention) - I assumed it was something a bit more insidious. Either way he maintained his innocence and the charge was dropped.

I agree its actually a bit of a disgrace and I hope he sues the **** out of those involved for deformation. I mean touching a chicks ass out at a nightclub.... Its not the end of the world FFS!.


You would think it would of been something serious given the way it was handled. The UK is honestly not a place I would like to live. The politically correct BS has to stop over there!


Id actually go a step further and question ulterior motives to smear the AB's as a whole here I mean why else would they go for the huge media coverage of it?

 

[nzlizard]

Yup, UK police sound like a bunch of cocks for the way they handled this.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I, too, hate it when the police do their jobs.

 

[ncurd]

Id actually go a step further and question ulterior motives to smear the AB's as a whole here I mean why else would they go for the huge media coverage of it?

....:wall:

I'd rather here the full details of what was said before questions whether the police were right or not to investigate this. Rather than the singular event, was he coming on strongly? did she tell him to **** off? touching the bottom is very subjective in itself did he just do it move her out the way in crowded club or was it way more gropey and touch skin?

Point being we still don't know the details of the event just saying "he only touched her ass" when we don't know the context of it is massively different. Believe me having been out with girls on a night out (and being a small guy that threatens no one physically by my presence) it's not a pleasant experience when a guy comes on to them very strongly and they shouldn't be subjected to it.

 

[j'nuh]

I agree its actually a bit of a disgrace and I hope he sues the **** out of those involved for deformation.

Ugh, I hate it when this happens. A woman is the victim of sexual abuse, speaks up about it, and gets shouted down, not necessarily because she was lying, but because there was not enough evidence to support her claim.

This is why sexual abuse victims don't come forward. If they don't have proof enough for a court, which they rarely do, they are scared about how everyone else will treat them if they do come forward.

 

[austingtir]

Ugh, I hate it when this happens. A woman is the victim of sexual abuse, speaks up about it, and gets shouted down, not necessarily because she was lying, but because there was not enough evidence to support her claim.

This is why sexual abuse victims don't come forward. If they don't have proof enough for a court, which they rarely do, they are scared about how everyone else will treat them if they do come forward.

It works both ways though does it? This really does smack of the boy or the girl in this case crying wolf!

I read something about it the other day saying she didnt even actually know who did it and couldnt prove it was Mills at all? Im not saying he didnt do it as my information tells me he did but I certainly dont think he did anything serious (that warranted this whole saga) having talked to people that know the guy.

To call bum grabbing of a grown woman in a night club sexual abuse is really stretching it and further proves my point about the UK being a ridiculous cesspool of politically correct morons.

- - - Updated - - -

....:wall:

I'd rather here the full details of what was said before questions whether the police were right or not to investigate this. Rather than the singular event, was he coming on strongly? did she tell him to **** off? touching the bottom is very subjective in itself did he just do it move her out the way in crowded club or was it way more gropey and touch skin?

Point being we still don't know the details of the event just saying "he only touched her ass" when we don't know the context of it is massively different. Believe me having been out with girls on a night out (and being a small guy that threatens no one physically by my presence) it's not a pleasant experience when a guy comes on to them very strongly and they shouldn't be subjected to it.

You dont have to be a rocket scientist to work it out. Grown woman + night club + lots of drunk yobbos = **** happens.

- - - Updated - - -

Ugh, I hate it when this happens. A woman is the victim of sexual abuse, speaks up about it, and gets shouted down, not necessarily because she was lying, but because there was not enough evidence to support her claim.

This is why sexual abuse victims don't come forward. If they don't have proof enough for a court, which they rarely do, they are scared about how everyone else will treat them if they do come forward.

And the woman would never of ended up in this situation if the police had not blown the case out of all proportion as I said likely for ulterior motives. They had to sit down and think about what they were doing before they dragged him out of his club in front of the media!? Or is that totally normal in the UK?

I wonder how this case might have played out had England (or Wales for that matter) still been in the tournament? (im talking from a media standpoint more than the actual case but I do feel theres a chance it might have dragged on a bit more).

Heres how our media is reporting it.
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/spo...st-muliaina-s-agent-slams-cardiff-cops-q16439

 

[j'nuh]

It works both ways though does it? This really does smack of the boy or the girl in this case crying wolf!

I read something about it the other day saying she didnt even actually know who did it and couldnt prove it was Mills at all? Im not saying he didnt do it as my information tells me he did but I certainly dont think he did anything serious (that warranted this whole saga) having talked to people that know the guy.

To call bum grabbing of a grown woman in a night club sexual abuse is really stretching it and further proves my point about the UK being a ridiculous cesspool of politically correct morons.

Indecent touching is sexual abuse, and a crime, in pretty much every country, including your own?

See Section 135 here: http://rpe.co.nz/information/legal-definitions/sexual-abuse-and-other-sexual-crimes/

I wonder how this case might have played out had England still been in the tournament?

Eh, what do you mean?

 

[nickdnz]

So: As the story has been reported in New Zealand, he was being accused of touching a 19 year old women's bottom, on the outside of her pants. He was not convicted due to a lack of evidence.

I'll point out that yes - it is a crime. If someone did it to my girlfriend, I'd deck him and feel pretty justified. If it did happen then the victim has every right to file a complaint and expect police action.

However the way the police handled the situation - arresting a player while they were in the public spotlight - is in fact wrong. It limited any chance for name suppression - and it was done in a way that it would damage his reputation regardless of the subsequent result. It comes off very much as police grandstanding. As it is up to the victim to provide the burden of proof - and the police to take action on the reasonable assumption that it would win at court (and then fold under 'there is not enough evidence to get a conviction'), it does seem like a very, very poorly handled piece of police work - which seems like the only court they had a chance of winning was public opinion.

Again - I'm not saying that if he did touch anyone's ass in a nightclub when it was unwanted sexual contact, that he shouldn't be punished. But frankly, if as part of my job I was going to give a public speech - and directly after I finished police came to arrest me on a charge of sexual assault - then yeah, I'd certainly be looking at my legal options.

 

[j'nuh]

So: As the story has been reported in New Zealand, he was being accused of touching a 19 year old women's bottom, on the outside of her pants. He was not convicted due to a lack of evidence.

I'll point out that yes - it is a crime. If someone did it to my girlfriend, I'd deck him and feel pretty justified. If it did happen then the victim has every right to file a complaint and expect police action.

However the way the police handled the situation - arresting a player while they were in the public spotlight - is in fact wrong. It limited any chance for name suppression - and it was done in a way that it would damage his reputation regardless of the subsequent result. It comes off very much as police grandstanding. As it is up to the victim to provide the burden of proof - and the police to take action on the reasonable assumption that it would win at court (and then fold under 'there is not enough evidence to get a conviction'), it does seem like a very, very poorly handled piece of police work - which seems like the only court they had a chance of winning was public opinion.

Again - I'm not saying that if he did touch anyone's ass in a nightclub when it was unwanted sexual contact, that he shouldn't be punished. But frankly, if as part of my job I was going to give a public speech - and directly after I finished police came to arrest me on a charge of sexual assault - then yeah, I'd certainly be looking at my legal options.

There has to be some consideration over the circumstances though. Muliaina was playing for Connacht at the time, and was visiting Gloucester. Arresting him before the game would have meant he couldn't play in it, and that would have been just as broadly covered. After the game, I'm not sure of Connacht's preparations. They might have flown out that night. (And since it happened in March, and they couldn't arrest him until he was next in the UK in May, I assume there was some kind of jurisdiction issues.) I'm not entirely certain what kind of window they had to act in and how much they knew of where he would be and at what time.

 

[nickdnz]

There has to be some consideration over the circumstances though. Muliaina was playing for Connacht at the time, and was visiting Gloucester. Arresting him before the game would have meant he couldn't play in it, and that would have been just as broadly covered. After the game, I'm not sure of Connacht's preparations. They might have flown out that night. (And since it happened in March, and they couldn't arrest him until he was next in the UK in May, I assume there was some kind of jurisdiction issues.) I'm not entirely certain what kind of window they had to act in and how much they knew of where he would be and at what time.

Indeed. And if he wasn't staying overnight in a hotel (which I would find unlikely) - they could have got him at the airport, where people with warrants for their arrest are routinely detained. Either way he has to regularly be in the United Kingdom as part of his job, he wasn't a flight risk, and it is for an offense - which while certainly unsavory - couldn't possibly be punishable to the extent he would risk his career.

 

[HowieLO6]

Indeed. And if he wasn't staying overnight in a hotel (which I would find unlikely) - they could have got him at the airport, where people with warrants for their arrest are routinely detained. Either way he has to regularly be in the United Kingdom as part of his job, he wasn't a flight risk, and it is for an offense - which while certainly unsavory - couldn't possibly be punishable to the extent he would risk his career.

My understanding is that most teams actually hop on a plane after a game, on the basis that recovering at home is better for players involved.

When would you have arrested him? He's in the country, he's been identified as an individual to be placed under arrest. Why should the arresting party have to wait to fit in with his profession? I'll concede that on the pitch is hard to justify - changing rooms, out of the public eye perhaps - but your defence of the incident is staggering.

This is not "political correctness". This is a grown man - a powerful athlete no-less - committing abuse against a young lady. Not on.

 

[Tony Manx]

The police everywhere like their publicity but in England they do tend to overdo it like televised raid on the home of Cliff Richard covered live by the BBC and well publicized raids on other "celebs" a lot of of whom have been told no further action to be taken - hardly a not guilty endorsement!!

They use high profile cases to cover up their blinding inefficiencies in other areas and Mils was just another case of the sort! That is not me saying he was innocent or guilty by the way!

 

[ncurd]

Whilst I think the police were absolutely right to arrest the guy (bring him in for questioning) and anyone claiming its political correctness to do so needs a re-examination of their own personal morals about sexual advances on women (ask would you like it done to your mother/sister/daughter). The police get a serious accusation they are compelled to investigate it regardless of what truth is (and we don't know the details from either side, only a little snippet).

I do agree with Nick the police should explain why the arrest was done publically. I'm fairly sure they had a valid reason but at the end of the day were not America and 'perp walks' have no place here.

- - - Updated - - -

The Cliff Richard thing is complex a raid takes planning and a BBC jouno was tipped off it was going to happen. The police had to make deal with to keep the story under wraps so the raid was a surprise to Richard. I struggle to think how they could handle it better without putting further restriction on press reporting on crminal investigations which don't exist yet.

 

[nickdnz]

This is not "political correctness". This is a grown man - a powerful athlete no-less - committing abuse against a young lady. Not on.

Or as it turns out - didn't.

My 'staggering' defense of this incident: is that the UK police either need to be competent enough to establish a legitimate case against someone, or not arrest them in a public forum (or in general).

It has nothing to do with how I feel about the crime. Sexual assault of any kind (of which I would maintain this is on the lower spectrum) is reprehensible. However the case was dismissed because of a lack of evidence. Look at it this way - if he did in fact sexually assault her - your police were too sh*t to mount a sufficient case against him. If he didn't do it - then his reputation has been tarnished by a witch hunt.

 

[Tony Manx]

The Cliff Richard thing is complex a raid takes planning and a BBC jouno was tipped off it was going to happen. The police had to make deal with to keep the story under wraps so the raid was a surprise to Richard. I struggle to think how they could handle it better without putting further restriction on press reporting on crminal investigations which don't exist yet.

Tipped off by the police!!

 

[ncurd]

Tipped off by the police!!

Probably a lone officer looking for a playoff than any great conspiracy. Also it's equally likely some form of social engineering was used to find out about it the Sun phone hacking scandal shows how jouno's can get hold prevlidged information without anyone actually delibrately giving it away.

I've been to two seminar's about how social engineering work it can be pretty scary stuff.

 

[j'nuh]

Or as it turns out - didn't.

My 'staggering' defense of this incident: is that the UK police either need to be competent enough to establish a legitimate case against someone, or not arrest them in a public forum (or in general).

It has nothing to do with how I feel about the crime. Sexual assault of any kind (of which I would maintain this is on the lower spectrum) is reprehensible. However the case was dismissed because of a lack of evidence. Look at it this way - if he did in fact sexually assault her - your police were too sh*t to mount a sufficient case against him. If he didn't do it - then his reputation has been tarnished by a witch hunt.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) works independently from the police. The police merely assist the CPS with any investigations and arrests. It was the CPS that thought the case warranted investigation and took 7 months to throw out a case which had no evidence. Blame the CPS, not the police, for this.

 

[HowieLO6]

Or as it turns out - didn't.

My 'staggering' defense of this incident: is that the UK police either need to be competent enough to establish a legitimate case against someone, or not arrest them in a public forum (or in general).

It has nothing to do with how I feel about the crime. Sexual assault of any kind (of which I would maintain this is on the lower spectrum) is reprehensible. However the case was dismissed because of a lack of evidence. Look at it this way - if he did in fact sexually assault her - your police were too sh*t to mount a sufficient case against him. If he didn't do it - then his reputation has been tarnished by a witch hunt.

Apologies, it wasn't you who was suggesting that "**** happens". Careless on my part.

The police are stretched, underfunded, understaffed and financially ruined thanks to gross mismanagement by the powers that be. Definitely not entirely their fault.

 

[munstermuffin]

Wow the story is amazing.

Mils played a game.
Went out after and slapped a girl in ass.
She filed a sexual assault.
He gets his name dragged through mud. As well as his family getting stress.
And why isn't she named?

 

[j'nuh]

Wow the story is amazing.

Mils played a game.
Went out after and slapped a girl in ass.
She filed a sexual assault.
He gets his name dragged through mud. As well as his family getting stress.
And why isn't she named?

Because she's the victim and has done nothing wrong?