if you read a list of the charges, which he has admitted, this would be construed as sexual assault, whether then or now. why some continue on about the money, seem to miss the point entirely. That this man used his status, celebrity to lure often very girls and committed acts of indecency on them, against their will. The woman featured in the paper was offended, very upset by it, but chose not to pursue the matter years ago, because of what her father had told her, that they were nobodies and he was a somebody, a star, so who is going to believe a child? There is a lot of truth in that, particularly when you consider the time these events happened. Some get over it, some do not, to constantly assert that they are only after the money beggars belief. We have seen with the horrendous Jimmy Savile case and endless Catholic priests who abused their charges that many children won't be believed even if they did tell the authorities at the time. I for one think that the authorities will weed out those with no case to answer, and that those brave enough to come forward now, will at least perhaps get their day in court.