Tags

, ,


Recently there have been high-profile cases against celebrities for crimes dating back as far a 40 years or more. Some have led to convictions whilst others have led only to heartache for those found to be innocent.

I must confess this bothers me somewhat: it seems that you can now be convicted purely on hearsay evidence. How can you prove that a man touched you inappropriately forty years ago? What’s more, how can he prove that he didn’t? I’m glad we have, “Innocent until proven guilty” in this country, not the other way around. Don’t get me wrong, I deplore crimes against women of any age, but it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that compensation seekers are ‘having a go’. I think it very unfair that accusers are protected by anonymity, and suffer no repercussions after the trial, whilst the one found innocent is labeled for life…”No smoke without fire” etc.

Lastly, why is it only celebrities? You never hear of cases being brought against Joe Nobody, does that mean it’s less of a crime for the none famous? Or is it that there is no mileage in it for the media/police force?

Advertisements