Skip to content

Moss doesn’t get charged

June 15, 2006
Another failure of the CPS

Kate Moss is caught on camera snorting a powder. The CPS admit that Kate Moss was probably taking controlled drugs, but because no-one could prove which class of drug it was, she gets away with it.

She has also got away with supplying whatever substance it was, because of the same reason.

A lawyer says that it may well have been an inert powder and she could have been set up!

That has to be the most banal, stupid, ignorant and obsequious statement I’ve heard from any solicitor in a long time.

If this was a scurrilous attempt to discredit this second rate clothes horse, why on earth would she check into rehab if she had been snorting an “inert powder”?

It beggars belief – but deep down we all knew that she would get away with it somehow or other.

I just hope someone has sent a referral to the Social Services, so they can check on the welfare of the poor kid she spawned.

5 Comments leave one →
  1. jon permalink
    June 15, 2006 21:42

    What a pity left-wing bleeding-heart niceties like evidence and reasonable doubt get in the way of you locking up these obvious threats to society!

  2. Stan Still permalink
    June 15, 2006 21:48

    Sorry Jon, perhaps it was unreasonable of me not to think that she was perhaps snorting a cold remedy up her hooter?

    Get real – she was inhaling something she shouldn’t have been inhaling, but she gets away with it. Cocaine is a threat to society, which is why mandatory drug testing was brought, in to prove that those responsible for acquisitive crime are doing it to fund a habit.

    Perhaps the fact that she pays for her inert powder out of her own money makes it OK?

  3. ExtraSpecialCopper permalink
    June 16, 2006 08:38

    Doesnt suprise me anymore. There are occasions where the cps are reluctant to charge with a full admission, cctv, witnesses . . .

  4. Anonymous permalink
    June 16, 2006 13:41

    One of my cases was at court recently. I had obtained CPS advice before charging the suspect – who was charged with possession of a pointed/bladed article as, after being arrested for drink driving, he was found to be in possession of a VERY savage looking knife.

    In interview he made up some totally nonsense story to do with him being a keen gardner. Total rubbish and if ever a person was going to be found guilty it was him – he had after all admitted to being in possession of the knife and his story was rubbish and hardly one of the recognised defences – he was not exactly in his garden when arrested.

    So it goes to trial and the CPS decide to offer no evidence and the case is dismissed. They had the papers, they had the exhibit, they had everything they could possibly need! It really does drive me mad sometimes…!

  5. Bystander permalink
    June 19, 2006 19:04

    I’m with Jon on this one. We may all of us be pretty sure what she was up to, but that is a long way of the evidential standard needed in court. It’s a high test, but any of us could have cause to be grateful for it one day.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: