Cliff Richard in court

[ApusApus]

I agree, however I also understand, where for example, a rape allegation is made, that we don't want to deter rape victims of coming forward - as it is vital all victims feel free to report abuse,,,,,

I agree that all victims should feel free to report alleged abuse but should the alleged perpetrator be named before they are either arrested or ultimately found guilty?


Shane

[Firefly]

Of course not Shane, surely it will influence peoples view of that person.

[Dominic]

As I understand it, the reason they name suspects beforehand is in the hope that other victims will come forward. However, this is surely an assumption of guilt. If you are innocent until proven guilty, then you should be allowed anonymity. Or, if you aren't allowed anonymity, neither should your accuser.

[TLR]

As I understand it, the reason they name suspects beforehand is in the hope that other victims will come forward. However, this is surely an assumption of guilt. If you are innocent until proven guilty, then you should be allowed anonymity. Or, if you aren't allowed anonymity, neither should your accuser.

Frankly that defence is not convincing........if someone actually comes to trial, after a full police investigation and examination of the evidence by the CPS, then that is the time to name the accused.
(As it is under Scots law, and the BBC have been in trouble in Scotland for not understanding that fact.)
Any further accusations after committal can be examined and put forward for consideration by the CPS in the same way.
Anything else is a fishing expedition, and beyond damaging to the innocent.
"He who filches my good name........"

[Dominic]

I agree.

[ApusApus]

As do I!


Shane

[mikesjn]

Rape evidence flaws may have put hundreds of innocents in jail
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... isclosure/

After conviction, unless a judge orders that it is in the best interest of public safety. It is supposed to be a legal system, rather than a freak show.

[ApusApus]

Looks like the BBC won't back down https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44961556!


Shane

[Firefly]

Press freedom ?

So it's ok to blacken somebody's name as long as it's under the heading of 'press freedom' what rot.

Jackie

[Kili01]

Have the BBC been penalised financially over this for the part their ‘news reporters’ played in publicising this? They come out of this whole sorry saga with muck on their feet. Freedom of the press needs to be redefined in this modern age. Above all the rights of the accused of not being named before trial should be clearly defined. Unless for example it is really necessary for public safety or national security reasons to release a name.

Dee

[trevnhil]

At least his legal costs of £850,000 are to be paid by the Police authority. Good for him.

OH !!! The headline I saw read...
BBC agrees to pay Sir Cliff Richard £850,000 in costs on top of his £210,000 in damages - but appeals privacy ruling over its coverage of a police raid on his home

[ApusApus]

Add to that their own legal fees & the costs associated with pursuing an appeal then that figure is only going skywards. Looks like the BBC really knows how to make the best use of the money generated through licence fees!


Shane

[71 Trans Am]

A news report has just said that a High Court Judge has just dismissed the BBC’s application to appeal and that the original ruling must stand – He has also instructed the BBC to pay £875,000 towards Sir Cliffs legal costs and other possible expenses could be included – Which means the BBC also now has to pay its own legal fees of £1.5M - I expect the TV Licence will be going up to claw this lot back – But I think the decision and principle is right to reject an appeal application as the BBC went too far this time.

[Firefly]

Well they don't spend much on new programmes, I'm fed up of repeats. No doubt the TV licence will increase accordingly

Jackie

[Chaddy]

Yes Aspus,i,ve never been in the position where I was free to spend someone else,s money,and if I had,and spent it wrongly not got the sack. Incredible!!
If this had happened in the ( private ) company that I worked most of my life then sackings would certainly have taken place.