Where will this end? I think a world famous Hollywood actress seriously sexually assaulted me 40 years ago - can I have some compo please or I will go the Police? I remain anonymous, but her name is spread over the world's press and her reputation destroyed. I have a very uneasy feeling about all these 'historical' allegations towards household names. If they have committed offences why have the allegations been delayed for long?
Where will this end? I think a world famous Hollywood actress seriously sexually assaulted me 40 years ago - can I have some compo please or I will go the Police? I remain anonymous, but her name is spread over the world's press and her reputation destroyed. I have a very uneasy feeling about all these 'historical' allegations towards household names. If they have committed offences why have the allegations been delayed for long?
I'm sure it's not at all related to celebrities kicking off about papers to the Leveson Enquiry....
Where will this end? I think a world famous Hollywood actress seriously sexually assaulted me 40 years ago - can I have some compo please or I will go the Police? I remain anonymous, but her name is spread over the world's press and her reputation destroyed. I have a very uneasy feeling about all these 'historical' allegations towards household names. If they have committed offences why have the allegations been delayed for long?
I'm sure we've done this. The issue with asking why people haven't reported these crimes is that it all went on under circumstances that most people would find impossible to imagine; Teenagers meeting heroes of pop, television, movie stars and the like - people they admire, trust, are in awe of... It's the classic scenario for virtually all unreported sexual assaults in that there's a fear that nobody will believe you, there's a feeling of shame, you blame yourself etc - except this is raised to the nth degree because of the godlike status of 'celebrities' that already existed even then.
Some of these victims, it turns out, DID report their abusers, but it got swept under the carpet by various people who may have been ignorant, naive, incompetent or proactively obstructive (or some combination of these) or maybe they were intimidated, bullied, scared of losing their job, manipulated to think it wasn't what they initially thought, convinced that if it didn't result in a conviction it would be THEM that went to prison or whatever.
I understand why you're uneasy about this and, I'm sure, there are a number of people who are willing to make false accusations in order to get attention or something, but how significant a number is this? Suffice to say, I don't think these people are the majority. I also don't believe the police would prosecute and name the suspects in such a high profile case on the whim of an attention seeking nutjob.
Agree LR. It's telling that in the case of Hall and Smith there were more than one accuser. I'm not saying that one person shouldn't be believed but in those cases in was three or more separate victims coming forward.
What I want to know is how on earth you prove anything after such a long period of time? Can you really secure convictions based on what amounts to the vague recollections of people from, in some cases, 40 years ago? I'm not for one moment condoning any sort of sexual misconduct but I worry about how this will be resolved.
bearing in mind the job perhaps he is being questioned about any information he has suppressed over the years rather than any crimes he may have committed
having said from what i see/hear/read of him i cant say that i like him
Does it matter why they never reported it to the police when it happened? Does that excuse the crime? Does it make it any lesser an offence?
The problem is one of the press reporting arrests, not one of victims reporting crimes later than we expect would for any other type of crime. The press should not be able to report these events until such time as the matter has been tested in a court of law, for the damage done by such allegations there is no recourse in law. Once it has been made public there is no way to retract it moreover, the police are now forced by law to investigate no matter how little actual evidence there is and that normally means an arrest, it's a totally stupid situation.
Victims need to be protected but so does everyone, this type of publicity has led to deaths in the past even though the allegations were proved to be unfounded. In the past the odds of getting a conviction in cases like these was low and required change however the ballence does seems to have gone too far in the other direction. More needs to be done to protect the rights of the accused until such time as they have received the decision of a court, then restrictions can be lifted if found guilty.
Loco - totally agree. Friend of mine was falsely accused of rape and it basically ruined his life whilst the silly bitch who brought the charges was safely anonymous.
Unless there are a few 'Monica Lewinsky' items of evidence knocking around after 20, 30 or 40 years, I'm sure that some of these cases will be hard to prove. On the other hand, if people have been charged, the Police and CPS must be pretty sure of their ground.
Slimey little bastard. Still, should be able to advise himself on how to sell his story to the NOTW....oh no he won't....Who next ? 4-5 Simon Cowell. 5-2 Noel Edmonds, 5-1 Cilla Black, 33-1 Dale Winton. 100-1 The Pope.
bearing in mind the job perhaps he is being questioned about any information he has suppressed over the years rather than any crimes he may have committed
having said from what i see/hear/read of him i cant say that i like him
Just as a matter of info and not a comment on Clifford or anyone else, the decision to arrest is made by the police but the decision to charge is made by the CPS after considering all the evidence the police have gathered (which will include any comments made by the suspects in interview.) I suspect that any decision will be weeks away.
Bryan the phrase 'helping with enquiries' is always used - even where the suspect has been arrested (as here) and makes no comment to each and every question (including, sometimes, being asked to confirm their name.)
Comments
"If I go down for this you're all coming with me" would be his thinkin.
Could be a very threadbare pantomime season this year!
**Next line reserved for Dave Memhet**
''He's behind you!''
Lifes a hitch Mr Clifford!
The issue with asking why people haven't reported these crimes is that it all went on under circumstances that most people would find impossible to imagine;
Teenagers meeting heroes of pop, television, movie stars and the like - people they admire, trust, are in awe of... It's the classic scenario for virtually all unreported sexual assaults in that there's a fear that nobody will believe you, there's a feeling of shame, you blame yourself etc - except this is raised to the nth degree because of the godlike status of 'celebrities' that already existed even then.
Some of these victims, it turns out, DID report their abusers, but it got swept under the carpet by various people who may have been ignorant, naive, incompetent or proactively obstructive (or some combination of these) or maybe they were intimidated, bullied, scared of losing their job, manipulated to think it wasn't what they initially thought, convinced that if it didn't result in a conviction it would be THEM that went to prison or whatever.
I understand why you're uneasy about this and, I'm sure, there are a number of people who are willing to make false accusations in order to get attention or something, but how significant a number is this? Suffice to say, I don't think these people are the majority. I also don't believe the police would prosecute and name the suspects in such a high profile case on the whim of an attention seeking nutjob.
Only my opinion, of course.
bearing in mind the job perhaps he is being questioned about any information he has suppressed over the years rather than any crimes he may have committed
having said from what i see/hear/read of him i cant say that i like him
The problem is one of the press reporting arrests, not one of victims reporting crimes later than we expect would for any other type of crime. The press should not be able to report these events until such time as the matter has been tested in a court of law, for the damage done by such allegations there is no recourse in law. Once it has been made public there is no way to retract it moreover, the police are now forced by law to investigate no matter how little actual evidence there is and that normally means an arrest, it's a totally stupid situation.
Victims need to be protected but so does everyone, this type of publicity has led to deaths in the past even though the allegations were proved to be unfounded. In the past the odds of getting a conviction in cases like these was low and required change however the ballence does seems to have gone too far in the other direction. More needs to be done to protect the rights of the accused until such time as they have received the decision of a court, then restrictions can be lifted if found guilty.
Bryan the phrase 'helping with enquiries' is always used - even where the suspect has been arrested (as here) and makes no comment to each and every question (including, sometimes, being asked to confirm their name.)