After reading this week how the family of Milly Dowler were treated in Court, it just shows that defendants have more rights than their victims.
Apart from having to live through the painful experience of listening to how their daughter died the parents also had to listen to the slurs to Milly’s personality and character along with having their own personal sex-life spilled out in Court for everyone to hear and report.
Levi Bellfield was on trial not the parents of Milly Dowler. All families have their ups and downs and a lot of teenagers have thoughts of they are not good enough. The reason being is that they are going through puberty, they are in that phase where they are too old for Noddy and too young for serious relationships.
The hormones are changing in their bodies and this has a great deal to do with the way they think. Teenagers become moody, touchy, argumentative, rebellious and sometimes a real pain to live with. Ask any parent, those teenage years for some can be a nightmare.
Most families deal with the trials and tribulations of a teenager in the confines of their own home and above all in private. Yet Milly Dowler’s family were subjected in Court to horrendous defamatory attacks on their daughter by a defence who was trying to make out Milly Dowler was a problematic teenager. Whether she was problematic or not is irrespective, Levi Bellfield had no right to take her life.
Milly Dowler came from a normal loving family, her family should not have been subjected to a trial where it felt as if they were in fact in the dock and standing trial and not Levi Bellfield.
How a parent copes with the death of their child is hard enough but to have to be subjected to cross-examination that was uncalled for and totally unnecessary is beyond contempt.
Milly’s mother collapsed after she gave evidence, due to the horrendous cross-examination of the defence. Whether Milly was happy or not she still had a right to life. She did not deserve to be murdered. And her family should never have been subjected to a cross-examination that was uncalled for and totally irrelevant to the trial.
Footballers apply to the Courts for super-injunctions to that the world does not know who they have played away with, yet a family of a murdered child are not given the same rights.
Why the Judge allowed this form of questioning I do not know. What Mr and Mrs Dowler got up to behind their own bedroom door is private and no-way should it have had any impact on the case. Many children at some point stumble across things or parents making love. It is down to the parents to explain and make sure their children understand, it surely does not need to be exposed in a Court where the parents of a murdered child are not on trial.
Bellfield might be serving a life sentence for the murder of Milly and will never be free to harm another person, but he is not the only person serving a life sentence, the family of Milly Dowler are as well.
How can a system deny a victims family basic human rights? And how can a Judge allow a family to be subjected to such irrelevant cross-examination?