janie48 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 My worry is how can any of these allegations be proved in a court of law, especially those from 40/50 years ago, unless there is photographic evidence to show the alleged complaint took place. I can see many thousands of pounds getting spent on these cases, only for them to be thrown out of court for lack of evidence. What about the "celebrity" in all this, I assume poop sticks, and their status in society will never be regained, even if taken to court and found innocent. If found guilty, I hope the maximum sentence would be imposed of course, and their "celebrity" status not taken into account. Angel. Some people have been convicted and sentenced of child abuse dating back a few decades ago without proof of evidence. I suppose there would have to be more then one person and more likely several accounts before such a case would go to court. The financial cost of it shouldn't be taken into account, but then another way of looking at it is if every single person who had experienced a traumatic sexual encounter at some time in the distant past felt the need to report the event later in life to help them deal with the damage it had caused them, the courts would be inundated with such cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Some people have been convicted and sentenced of child abuse dating back a few decades ago without proof of evidence. I suppose there would have to be more then one person and more likely several accounts before such a case would go to court. The financial cost of it shouldn't be taken into account, but then another way of looking at it is if every single person who had experienced a traumatic sexual encounter at some time in the distant past felt the need to report the event later in life to help them deal with the damage it had caused them, the courts would be inundated with such cases. I would be interested to know those cases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 The vast majority of sexual offences that reach court are word against word, as I have already observed sexual activity is more often than not conducted in private away from others. There is no need for corroboration any more - there used to be - and that is what prevented many word on word allegations never getting to a court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I would be interested to know those casesWould you? perhaps you should do a little research then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Yes this information was given out months ago by a certain well known ex Surrey Detective. He was so sure of his info that he stated "I would not dare state it otherwise" So that was enough to convince me. Also an article today states Police refused to confirm that Harris was being investigated. (When the name slipped out.) Wonder why that was then ??????? and by whose orders. Isn't it obvious? On David Cameron's explicit orders to "distract public attention away from how bad the government is doing and the state of the economy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Would you? perhaps you should do a little research then. You cant have any case without evidence of some kind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 You cant have any case without evidence of some kindThat's what you would expect, the police surely wouldn't arrest someone accused of a sex crime that happened years before without being sure they have enough evidence to take it to prosecution. What actual evidence is required after a long period of time I have no idea? but I have read of cases where people have been convicted of rape years after the event was said to have occurred, though it must be difficult to prove unless other victims have reported the same person. ---------- Post added 21-04-2013 at 22:25 ---------- Its a question of what is regarded as evidence isn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strix Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 It also makes it much worse for the person accused ,it doesnt matter if Harris ,Le vell etc are found innocent of all charges s**t sticks and their public lives at least will be over.. there's victims on both sides, what do we do , just ignore false accusations ? Its very easy when youre in the public eye to be targetted ,its funny of all the names thats been bandied about theres no no- marks in the frame actually, the police have said there has been an increase in reports of no-marks carrying out sexual abuse too, it's just that those aren't trumpeted by the media http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9744484/Child-abuse-allegations-soar-in-wake-of-Savile-scandal.html Savile's allegations being taken seriously has led to a confidence that the authorities will now listen. Who is going to re-live an abhorrent experience, repeating it to strangers, if the odds say they'll be told to go home and forget about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clown Shoes Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Are they just arresting everyone that was a children's presenter in the 80's? They are missing Timmy Mallet & The Chuckle Brothers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Are they just arresting everyone that was a children's presenter in the 80's? They are missing Timmy Mallet & The Chuckle Brothers! When they get round to the 90's Tinky Winky will be shaking in his shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.