General Chat

The jury in the trial of Coronation Street actor William Roache (Ken Barlow) has found him not guilty of all charges.

How does an 81-year-old whose life has been torn apart by the allegations he faced - put them behind him, move on and start to rebuild it?

God knows,

It appears to me that since the jimmy savile revelations people are just trying to jump on the bandwagon in the hope of compensation, Which make me wonder how many of his alleged victims actually were victims,

It's a dangerous thing for all involved when people make false allegations in this way because it brings an air of doubt in the evidance given by the real victims.

Roy

in cases like this I feel the accusers should be named

Hooray! What a relief this verdict must be for Bill and his family. I have fingers crossed for D.L.T and Rolf Harris as I don't believe that either of these guys are guilty either.

same here!!!

I can't for the life of me understand why any women would put them selves through this. Except I suppose for their fifteen minutes of fame or enormous compensation. I hope that. I hope that William Roache and his family will be able to move on.

Edit typo

I,m begining to wonder after the fiasco of the early investigation (Failed or Abandoned) Of Saville, whether they have got a League table as to who can claim the biggest Scalp.Its not doing any good to the people who have been genuinely Abused in this way. :-|

couldn't agree more Merlin - and I feel the accusers should be prosecuted

as you say, it's the genuine victims who are harmed by cases like this

Does not surprise me in the least. Last week one lot of charges were dropped because his accuser could not actually remember the assault actually happening!!!

Does make you wonder just how many very sad and lonely people there are out there who are so desperate for attention they will make wild allegations, which just makes a mockery of all those poor women (and men) who do suffer rape and sexual assaults.

If any of Mr. Roaches accusers are found to be 'jumping on the bandwagon' then they should be prosecuted for wasting police time.

Too many reputations are now being ruined by false allegations. A sad sign of the times.

The victims, real or otherwise, are allowed to remain anonymous. I think the accused should have the same right, with the trial held in camera. The names could be released if there is a guilty verdict, when they would deserve everything they got.

Hear, hear Andysmum...........if you are innocent until proved guilty, no-one should have the right to sully your reputation until after the verdict.

I agree Andysmum, that the accused should also remain anonymous but in cases such as this one there is no way that a 'high profile' person would be out of the papers for long. Also, Facebook would be full of it and include even more dubious 'facts'.
This case shouldn't have gone to court. It makes me wonder if 'the law' is on a damage limitation spree after the dead djs disgrace.

I agree with your final sentence Island.

Guilty until proved innocent, it appears.

How often & on what inadequate data do we misjudge one another! His pain is his own & nobody else can suffer it for him.

I have to agree with everything said here, and also feel like Magpie and AnnCardiff that the same result is brought about for DLT and Rolf Harris. I have never believed it of them.

not sure about DLT but Rolf? not in my book

I worry for the health of Rolf Harris, he looks a broken man.

Rolf does worry me too.

We dont know him personally but he always comes across as being devoted to his wife.

i do think witchunts are going on now in the wake of the Jimmy Saville revelations

From numerous reports it appears that Saville's reign of abuse stretched from 1955 to 2009, and according to some reports people in the highest echelons of the BBC, the Police, and Government, had knowledge of this.

When the Saville scandal hit the headlines, it created panic throughout, the BBC, the Police, and the Public Prosecution system. Whether a case would bring about a conviction in a court of law was of no consequence, what was more important was that it was seen that allegations of sexual abuse were being taken seriously, and what followed in my opinion was twofold - numerous individuals jumped on the band wagon hoping to make an easy buck and the authorities began what I can only describe as a sort of witch hunt.

A corner stone of the law in this country used to be that you were innocent until proven guilty, that corner stone is slowly being eroded away. In my view any individual who is being investigated in connection with a criminal offence should remain anonymous until such times as they appear in court before a judge or magistrate, and only once the charges have been put to them in a court of law, should they be named but only if the judge or magistrate considers it is in the interests of justice to do so.

I agree that modern social media is a problem, in saying that the full force of the law covering contempt of court should be used against anyone making comments that could affect a fair trial.

On another note - I would love to be able to read the various documents stored in The National Archives showing who knew what about the Saville and other scandals
;-)

Should the police arrest people first & then drum up some charges later?

Maybe this is happening already. Hope not!