In The Wake Of Sir Cliff's Exoneration.......

[ToraToraTora]

1) Are the police and the Media now the tools of compo seeking lowlives who now know they have unlimited power to ruin lives at a whim?
2) Should the accusers also be named?
3) Should the Police have to do a preliminary investigation to establish credibility of the accuser before savaging the accused with no evidence?
4) Should false accusers be prosecuted?

[sandyRoe]

How could they differentiate between cases with insufficient evidence and malicious accusers?

[Gromit]

1. No
2. No
3. No
4. Yes

1. If a complaint is made, the police have to investigate. It should make no difference if the accused is famous, with a reputation to maintain or you or I.

2. Not initially. But the accused should be until they are either arrested or prosecuted.

3. They should test the credibilty of the evidence, not the accuser. Part of that will be to look at the accuser's record. Part of the problem in this case was that the search for evidence was very public. Evidence gather should be more discreet, and not done in the media glare.

4. Malicious false accusers should be named. And prosecuted for wasting police time. If the accuser turns out to be mentally ill, or if they appear genuine but no evidence can support their claim, then their name should be withheld.

[Gromit]

Amend
2. Not initially. But the accused should NOT be until they are either arrested or prosecuted.

[youngmafbog]

All of it for me. I would prefer neither to be named but you canttrust Plod not to leak it to the BBC.

[hc4361]

Is there any reason that the lowlife homeless ex-con could not have been raped as a child?

[hc4361]

Gromit, do you mean charged and not arrested?

[Baldric]

1. Looks that way.
2. Yes.
3. Yes they should.
4. Yes.

[hc4361]

Prosecute false accuser, he is found not guilty - so do this mean that the accused abuser has to be re-tried?

[mikey4444]

hc....not sure who you mean by "lowlife homeless ex-con" I understand that his identity is not publically known.

But if you mean the person who has made these allegations....I agree...he could have been raped as a child just as easily as anyone else. Lots of children were.

[hc4361]

mikey, I was referring to question 3, establish credibility of the accuser. How exactly does the police the do that? They already check that the checkable facts stand up - time, place etc. If the accuser says that the offences occurred in 1974 in London and it can be proved beyond doubt that the accused was in New York during the whole of that year, the case will not proceed.

Let's assume all the checkable facts are verified - theoretically the offence could have happened - is the accuser to be dismissed because he has a criminal record, huge debts, a psychiatric disorder?

[mikey4444]

I may have misunderstood your post hc !....is the accuser to be dismissed because he has a criminal record, huge debts, a psychiatric disorder?

No, of course not.

[hc4361]

Exactly, I don't see how the credibility of the accuser can be established.

[ToraToraTora]

I think they need some actual evidence hc, they had none but the word of the accuser here. No one should have the power to haul anyone through it like this.

[hc4361]

They can't find evidence unless they investigate which means investigating the accused.

[mikey4444]

Well, I guess that it is up to the police. Its their job to investigate and establish credibility on all sides. When the time frame is long ago, as it is in this case, than that must be a very hard task.

[ToraToraTora]

yeah but use a bit of common, middle aged bloke looking for a pay off, simples, bet he didn't accuse anyone poor did he? if they must, investogate discretely not phone all the hacks from the BBC so the poor bloke gets to see his house raided on prime time TV.

[mikey4444]

TTT...I have already said that the Police and the BBC have not covered themselves in glory here, but what you have suggested in your last post is pure supposition. The Police need to establish that the witness and his accusation is valid, although hopefully better than the Police have done in this incident.

[hc4361]

Not every case of historic sexual abuse involves a rich celeb. A teacher in his 90s was found guilty last year and sent to prison.

The chap in the Cliff Richard case brings to mind the family in the Michael Jackson case. Didn't they try to blackmail Jackson before they reported it to the authorities?

[mikey4444]

hc....men are being tried and sent to prison for child sexual abuse on what looks like a weekly basis here in Britain. As you say, hardly any of them are famous in any way. Just because the offences may have happened years ago, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be investigated.

[ummmm]

Naomi. I had a visit from the police years back. Someone had made an accusation and gave my name saying they think the same had happened to me. Why the hell should I have been named for telling the truth???