ChatterBank32 mins ago
Stuart Hall arrested, oh no, not another one!!!
26 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by netibiza. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
This man's arrest is not part of the Savile investigation, but Savile's case has surely prompted others to speak out now they know, for the first time, that they will be heard and something will be done.
The complaint is that these cases can't be proved because it's one person's word against another's. Now, this does not stop other prosecutions. One police officer's word has convicted many a criminal; the jury had no trouble deciding who was lying. And the same applies when the sole material witness is an ordinary citizen.
But, years ago, any case of a sexual nature required the evidence of the complainant to be corroborated, in a material particular, by some evidence which was independent of the complainant's. Virtually no other cases had that requirement; curiously, speeding required corroboration; but in sexual assaults it was considered essential and many a rapist, many a sexual assailant, went free because of it. Had the rapist or sexual attacker contented himself with ordinary assault, the woman's testimony alone would have been sufficient. That's one reason why men got away with such behaviour.
The complaint is that these cases can't be proved because it's one person's word against another's. Now, this does not stop other prosecutions. One police officer's word has convicted many a criminal; the jury had no trouble deciding who was lying. And the same applies when the sole material witness is an ordinary citizen.
But, years ago, any case of a sexual nature required the evidence of the complainant to be corroborated, in a material particular, by some evidence which was independent of the complainant's. Virtually no other cases had that requirement; curiously, speeding required corroboration; but in sexual assaults it was considered essential and many a rapist, many a sexual assailant, went free because of it. Had the rapist or sexual attacker contented himself with ordinary assault, the woman's testimony alone would have been sufficient. That's one reason why men got away with such behaviour.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.