Bill Roache Arrested

[zebo]

Bill Roache has apparently been arrested on a sex claim about an incident in 1967 when he's supposed to have raped a 15 year old girl!

[ummmm]

FGS...In the 'other' post.

[Vicasso]

'Youthful hormones with female peers'....
He was born in 1932 and would be 35 in 1967

[FredPuli43]

Another man who should not have been named, unless he's charged

[Bbbananas]

I agree - don't think they should be named unless charged. Mud sticks n all that.
The price of fame I suppose?

[Bazile]

Dont worry sqad - there is no extradition treaty with Spain - trust me

[FredPuli43]

Doesn't the European Arrest Warrant run in Spain, baz? Has anyone seen Sqad in the UK in the last few years?

[Bazile]

Perhaps in hindsight ( in more ways than one ) he regrets coming out with his statement -

'' Sex abuse victims bring it upon themselves, Bill Roache claims ''

It's possible that the victim had learn to live with what happened and was getting on with her life - however his statement brought it all back to the forefront of her mind and incensed her so much that she has now come forward with the allegation

[Bazile]

Fred

We dont want sqad to spend the rest of his retirement , looking over his shoulder - so him beleiving there is no extradition treay with spain will lessen the worry :-)

[Goodsoulette]

I may be about to be lynched but what evidence could there possibly be. There are definitely women that cry rape out there, there are definitely women who become ashamed of what they did when they were younger, they may realise that it isn't socially acceptable for 40 year old men to sleep with teenagers and feel that this is rape. I'm not convinced. These aren't men showing the predatory behaviour of that of Saville, they are men who were celebrities. I'm not condoning rape, but in the last few years first hand Ive seen a few female aquaintances make up such stories and I don't want to pass judgement on a man/men who could very well be guilty. Triall by media is a disgrace, it really should not be allowed.

[sherrardk]

He has actually been charged with two counts of rape so the police must have some evidence.

[anneasquith]

I agree sher, why would the CPS WASTE MONEY UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE.

[DaisyNonna]

Ummmm, remember being hauled over the coals in 1966 after writing an essay at an all girls school saying that rape was possible within marriage.
Have times changed?

Rather sad that police are spending so much time on what might have happened years ago when rapes now are still being questioned as to whether they have actually occurred.

[sir.prize]

The charge is unconnected to Scotland Yard's Operation Yewtree,

Wonder what prompted the complaint - particularly after 46 years.

[ummmm]

Daisy - isn't it horrible that women felt they couldn't come forward? I know there is much criticism about the benefits system but it gave abused women an escape route.

Sir.P - maybe his interview prompted it.

[DaisyNonna]

Sir P Bandwagons are for jumping on.

[Goodsoulette]

Charged is guilty yeah? In a crime such as rape? I know of a guy getting as far as court when he was 18 years old, for raping a 12 year old girl. They pursued with it, it got thrown out on the first day for many reasons not least of all because she was examined and still a virgin.

Are you aware that just being a complainant is considered evidence.... by telling people immediately after makes you them recent complain witnesses. Yes a lot of men walk free, but a lot are falsely accused. Sharpen the pitchforks but not all dudes are rapists just waiting for there chance to bag a schoolgirl.

[FredPuli43]

The CPS have decided that there is a strong case disclosed, one which will likely result in conviction, and that means that they feel that each complainant is credible..

There are a number of reasons why the complaint of a 15 year-old might not have been pursued. First is that there may not have been a complaint to police, simply because of the fame and supposed power of the suspect or simply because the victim feared she would not be believed. Second is the old rule about corroboration being essential. The distressed state, shock, and immediate complaint of the victim was not corroboration. The pernicious rule, outdated in 1967, had many a rapist acquitted or not charged at all.

Goodsoulette, whose account was it that you heard or read ? And when was the case? Under the present law, a virgin, both before and after, can be raped, because vaginal penetration is not now required for rape or attempted rape.More likely, given the age of the complainant, is that she simply did not come up to proof in the daunting circumstances of the courtroom.

[ST24]

All sex with minors, even consensual, is rape. I believe the legal term is Statutory Rape.

[jeanijay]

talk about kangaroo court

[ummmm]

ST - Not true.