Motoring1 min ago
Operation Yewtree And Celebrities
26 Answers
If you were a celebrity of the same age as somebody reportedly arrested under Operation Yewtree would you be tempted to take to social media such as Twitter and shout - IT AIN'T ME!
It must be tempting for celebs, especially if they see their name wrongly banded about.
It must be tempting for celebs, especially if they see their name wrongly banded about.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by hc4361. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If I were wrongly arrested that would be horrific but hopefully I'd be cleared and the press would report that.
To be wrongly guessed and named all over the media by know nowts must be equally hard - and there will be no exoneration in the press. Just a vague, nasty memory my name would be forever linked to.
To be wrongly guessed and named all over the media by know nowts must be equally hard - and there will be no exoneration in the press. Just a vague, nasty memory my name would be forever linked to.
That's the problem, spoonboy. When it's a she said, he said, she did, he did scenario with no physical proof how can the truth ever be out unless the accused confesses to the crime or the victim confesses to lying? Especially if the case is 40 or more years ago.
Imagine this scenario. A man with a very distinctive birth mark in an intimate place has a brief fling or one night stand with a consenting 18 year old woman. Nothing wrong there, legally, anyway.
The man becomes famous, he may already have been famous.
40 years on the woman has some sort of breakdown or is just vindictive. She researches the man on the internet and sees he was performing in a town, or lived or worked in a town, 44 years ago.
She goes to the police and accuses man of raping her 44 years ago in the January when he was playing Dick Whittington at the theatre. She can describe the theatre - she worked there briefly when she was 16. She can describe the birth mark. She can describe the rape in vivid detail.
He denies it happened as she says.
Now, how the hell can anyone decide which version is true?
Imagine this scenario. A man with a very distinctive birth mark in an intimate place has a brief fling or one night stand with a consenting 18 year old woman. Nothing wrong there, legally, anyway.
The man becomes famous, he may already have been famous.
40 years on the woman has some sort of breakdown or is just vindictive. She researches the man on the internet and sees he was performing in a town, or lived or worked in a town, 44 years ago.
She goes to the police and accuses man of raping her 44 years ago in the January when he was playing Dick Whittington at the theatre. She can describe the theatre - she worked there briefly when she was 16. She can describe the birth mark. She can describe the rape in vivid detail.
He denies it happened as she says.
Now, how the hell can anyone decide which version is true?
Is that how you think these sort of cases are decided, Hc? That the police just toss a coin to determine which story of equal worth they like the sound of best?
I seriously doubt that the CPS will bring any case to court unless they are confident they have evidence beyond just a declaration from one witness.
I seriously doubt that the CPS will bring any case to court unless they are confident they have evidence beyond just a declaration from one witness.
Do you think all historic assault cases took place in front of witnesses?
Some historic assault cases have no physical proof whatsoever, no collaborating evidence from witnesses, nothing but the say so of the victim. And that is right, for there must be many such occurrences. The police are duty bound to investigate all allegations which is likely to result in the arrest of the accused (not charged at this stage).
It is a fact that the credibility of the victim in these cases is key to the decision to charge the accused or not.
I am not suggesting for one minute that there is no credence in the Yewtree arrests, the fact that one person has admitted the crimes proves that Yewtree is working.
But it must be recognised that some 'victims' have lied - there has been a few recent prosecutions of 'victims' who have confessed to lying.
Some historic assault cases have no physical proof whatsoever, no collaborating evidence from witnesses, nothing but the say so of the victim. And that is right, for there must be many such occurrences. The police are duty bound to investigate all allegations which is likely to result in the arrest of the accused (not charged at this stage).
It is a fact that the credibility of the victim in these cases is key to the decision to charge the accused or not.
I am not suggesting for one minute that there is no credence in the Yewtree arrests, the fact that one person has admitted the crimes proves that Yewtree is working.
But it must be recognised that some 'victims' have lied - there has been a few recent prosecutions of 'victims' who have confessed to lying.
@HC What a strange thing to say. What in my previous post makes you think
"Do you think all historic assault cases took place in front of witnesses?"
Of course I don't think that.
"It must be recognised that some victims lie". Yes, some might, but all the evidence suggests that such instances are rare. I do not get your point, maybe I am missing something. You concede that it is right that such allegations are investigated by the police. The credibility of the witness and the alleged assailant will be assessed, by those experienced in such things. I would imagine it very unlikely the CPS would then proceed with a case in the absence of physical evidence unless the witness statements are so compelling and credible, or they have a confession from the alleged assailant.
If you know different,I would be interested to hear the detail.
If you are unhappy with the existing system though - what alternative would you propose that offers a better prospect of justice for the abused and fairness for those accused?
"Do you think all historic assault cases took place in front of witnesses?"
Of course I don't think that.
"It must be recognised that some victims lie". Yes, some might, but all the evidence suggests that such instances are rare. I do not get your point, maybe I am missing something. You concede that it is right that such allegations are investigated by the police. The credibility of the witness and the alleged assailant will be assessed, by those experienced in such things. I would imagine it very unlikely the CPS would then proceed with a case in the absence of physical evidence unless the witness statements are so compelling and credible, or they have a confession from the alleged assailant.
If you know different,I would be interested to hear the detail.
If you are unhappy with the existing system though - what alternative would you propose that offers a better prospect of justice for the abused and fairness for those accused?
I am not unhappy with the current system at all. But I do not agree that there must be compelling evidence to charge a person with historic rape. I maintain that often there is no evidence except for the victim's statement.
This is a no win situation. Either there is an enormous number of people who were sexually abused by people in power who have got away with it for years, or innocent people are being accused by vindictive liars. (I know it isn't an either/or situation. Some accusations may be true, some may be false).
What is true is that people are being named in the social media by people who are guessing at best, malicious at worse, before a person is charged and identified by the proper authorities.
My question is - if you were an innocent celeb falsely accused by the social media and not the police, how would you react?
My reply at 23.29 is a simplistic reply to spoonboy's simplistic and naive statement at 22.49. Finding the truth is not always easy.
This is a no win situation. Either there is an enormous number of people who were sexually abused by people in power who have got away with it for years, or innocent people are being accused by vindictive liars. (I know it isn't an either/or situation. Some accusations may be true, some may be false).
What is true is that people are being named in the social media by people who are guessing at best, malicious at worse, before a person is charged and identified by the proper authorities.
My question is - if you were an innocent celeb falsely accused by the social media and not the police, how would you react?
My reply at 23.29 is a simplistic reply to spoonboy's simplistic and naive statement at 22.49. Finding the truth is not always easy.
@HC It would seem that this is the core of your objection
"But I do not agree that there must be compelling evidence to charge a person with historic rape. I maintain that often there is no evidence except for the victim's statement."
I cannot give you a definitive answer, since I am not a legal expert.It would be interesting to get a more informed comment, since I disagree with your analysis.
And I suspect that the truth is that there were a large number of abuse cases that went unreported at the time, for fear of not being believed, or fear of reprisal, or simply because those abused hoped it would be less hurtful, less damaging to them if they just ignored it.
Where I would agree with you is in the speculations surrounding the identity of those accused, where the police have not officially released that information. But people are people, and curiosity and prurience are powerful traits. This kind of thing has always gone on - its just that it is magnified by current technology and social media.
As to your question - what would I do were I an innocent celeb accused of such actions - I don't know. Probably ignore them wherever possible, and employ someone to track the wilder speculations with a view to legal action. Along the lines of Lord McAlpines approach, I guess.
"But I do not agree that there must be compelling evidence to charge a person with historic rape. I maintain that often there is no evidence except for the victim's statement."
I cannot give you a definitive answer, since I am not a legal expert.It would be interesting to get a more informed comment, since I disagree with your analysis.
And I suspect that the truth is that there were a large number of abuse cases that went unreported at the time, for fear of not being believed, or fear of reprisal, or simply because those abused hoped it would be less hurtful, less damaging to them if they just ignored it.
Where I would agree with you is in the speculations surrounding the identity of those accused, where the police have not officially released that information. But people are people, and curiosity and prurience are powerful traits. This kind of thing has always gone on - its just that it is magnified by current technology and social media.
As to your question - what would I do were I an innocent celeb accused of such actions - I don't know. Probably ignore them wherever possible, and employ someone to track the wilder speculations with a view to legal action. Along the lines of Lord McAlpines approach, I guess.
Blimey - some thoughtful contributions here
Some of this has been posted before.
I was gonna say - that when the Perv Patrol screeches to a halt outside a naighbours house as I walk the dog - I clench my buttocks and try to stop mincing like Marilyn Monroe and repeat to my self - I am not a celeb - I am not a celeb.
The poor fella is led away in handcuffs - as the Bizzies whimper, everyone is videoing this ! and then people come around later and burn the house down (no bizzies there then)
Ho hum c'est la vie
The historical allegations have no proof or corroboration. Sexual offences havent reqd independent corrob for around twenty years.
They say that rape is only 15% reported - that is up a factor of 7 since I was at uni (1970) when it was said to be 2%. And one of the effects - I think it was Oliver Zangwill - is that with such low rates, you can double it (to 4%) without any increase in the actual incidence just by asking people to come forward or following having a famous case - or by advertising. So reported crime rises in these situations are almost impossible to analyse in any meaningful way. oh and our masters in these areas dont usually have degrees in stats either.
Some of this has been posted before.
I was gonna say - that when the Perv Patrol screeches to a halt outside a naighbours house as I walk the dog - I clench my buttocks and try to stop mincing like Marilyn Monroe and repeat to my self - I am not a celeb - I am not a celeb.
The poor fella is led away in handcuffs - as the Bizzies whimper, everyone is videoing this ! and then people come around later and burn the house down (no bizzies there then)
Ho hum c'est la vie
The historical allegations have no proof or corroboration. Sexual offences havent reqd independent corrob for around twenty years.
They say that rape is only 15% reported - that is up a factor of 7 since I was at uni (1970) when it was said to be 2%. And one of the effects - I think it was Oliver Zangwill - is that with such low rates, you can double it (to 4%) without any increase in the actual incidence just by asking people to come forward or following having a famous case - or by advertising. So reported crime rises in these situations are almost impossible to analyse in any meaningful way. oh and our masters in these areas dont usually have degrees in stats either.
Eddie Shah was recently acquitted - does anyone know what his successful defence was ?
It cannot have been - she looked 18 for chrissakes and behaved like 25 esp when money was mentioned - as one automatically pleads guilty to indecent assault if you run that defence.
and his interview over the week end certainly seems to entertain the possibility that celebs (whether he be one himself) are followed around or even preyed upon by screaming young girls who er well you know take their undies off......
It cannot have been - she looked 18 for chrissakes and behaved like 25 esp when money was mentioned - as one automatically pleads guilty to indecent assault if you run that defence.
and his interview over the week end certainly seems to entertain the possibility that celebs (whether he be one himself) are followed around or even preyed upon by screaming young girls who er well you know take their undies off......
I would suggest that standing outside the courtroom and declaring:
///I have a very loving family and they are very supportive and I think but for their love I might have been constrained to take my own life.
“They have encouraged me to fight on, to fight the charges and regain my reputation and good name and whatever I have represented to this country down the years.”
“May I just say these allegations are pernicious, callous, cruel and above all spurious. And may I just say I am not guilty and will be defending these accusations."///
may not be the best way to go......
Especially when your name is Stuart Hall and you plead Guilty shortly thereafter.
///I have a very loving family and they are very supportive and I think but for their love I might have been constrained to take my own life.
“They have encouraged me to fight on, to fight the charges and regain my reputation and good name and whatever I have represented to this country down the years.”
“May I just say these allegations are pernicious, callous, cruel and above all spurious. And may I just say I am not guilty and will be defending these accusations."///
may not be the best way to go......
Especially when your name is Stuart Hall and you plead Guilty shortly thereafter.
Latest Posts
Alice Perkins, Ex-Chair Of The Post...
News3 mins ago
News6 mins ago
Body & Soul6 mins ago
Technology9 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.