poliphilo

I understand he went to the police after the Savile affair broke and asked if they wanted to interview him and they said, "Don't worry, mate."

From:

ingenious76.livejournal.com

I remember a joke on an 80s sitcom about Wyman - the punchline was "the Stones need to tour, how else is Bill Wyman going to pay his new wife's school fees." You couldn't even think of putting that in a script now.

From:

It seemed odd at the time that his marriage was getting nodded through. Now it seems unbelievable.

From:

Not condoning rape in any form, but ... good lord, the alleged abuse was nearly half a century ago! It would be utterly, utterly impossible for someone to receive a fair trial in a case like that after so long.

It's one thing for a society to try to clear its conscience, but if the pendulum swings too far in the other direction, it creates a culture that's just as unfair.

From:

There are several of these high-profile historic abuse cases hanging fire at the moment. It will be interesting to see what happens if and when any of them comes to trial.

From:

I was abused by a teacher over forty years back.

It took me until a couple of years ago to deal with the fallout and to finally admit to myself and significant others what had happened and to cry myself gently clean and realise that he couldn't harm me any more.

Victims are victims even after half a century...........

Edited Date: 2013-05-01 02:16 pm (UTC)

From:

That's absolutely true, of course, and I don't mean in the slightest to dismiss the seriousness of incidents such as that.

But it's a cornerstone of a civilized society that every accused individual deserves a fair trial. And over the course of decades, human memories will change very dramatically; acquaintances and potential witnesses will pass away; and potential evidence will disappear. Because of all that, I really do believe that a fair trial becomes impossible after that many years ... and most legal systems recognize that by providing for a statute of limitations.

From:

I suspect the victim has been willing to come forward and testify as nothing could be done without that.

Her memory won't have shifted in the slightest if mine is anything to go by.

I'd gladly see the perpetrator in my case in court, but he died some years back and is beyond any earthly justice.

From:

resonant.livejournal.com

I am a licensed professional engineer. Suppose I accidentally make a mistake when I design my first bridge. I then have a long and successful career. I retire. The mistake I made suddenly manifests. The bridge then collapses, causing injury and death. Even though decades have passed, and even though I may no longer remember the details, I would be in court. Tort law and contract law do have time limits in some jurisdictions, but liability periods are still measured in decades.

If I am liable for decades for something that I do accidentally, I don't see why there is a short liability period for things people do ON PURPOSE.

From:

Saw the comment below but I have to say I agree with you anyway.

It took me years to deal with the fallout of what was done to me- I finally got my head round it just two years back.

In the meantime, my abuser went his merry way to the grave without a hint of guilt..........

I've no idea how many others he did it to- as a schoolteacher, he would have had that sort of power.

From:

resonant.livejournal.com

(whoops, posted on wrong comment).

I am a licensed professional engineer. Suppose I accidentally make a mistake when I design my first bridge. I then have a long and successful career. I retire. The mistake I made suddenly manifests. The bridge then collapses, causing injury and death. Even though decades have passed, and even though I may no longer remember the details, I would be in court. Tort law and contract law do have time limits in some jurisdictions, but liability periods are still measured in decades.

If I am liable for decades for something that I do accidentally, I don't see why there is a short liability period for things people do ON PURPOSE.

From:

There are two major differences. The first one is civil versus criminal liability -- you might be liable in civil court, but in first-world legal systems you wouldn't be liable in criminal court. The second difference is that even after its collapse, the design of your bridge could be documented, and that's certainly not the case for a 50-year-old alleged sexual assault.

The final, and most important, thing to remember is the basic principle of "innocent until proven guilty." An accusation is not the same as proof ... despite your apparent assumption that in this case, it is.

From:

resonant.livejournal.com

Her teacher is dead, so it'd be hard to put him on trial. So I'm OK with accepting her statement that he did it.

Both civil and criminal liability apply in Canada. In a recent example, an engineer designed a mall in the late 1970s, and it was constructed in 1980. The mall collapsed last year. The government is now tracking down the engineers involved over the years, and is laying criminal charges.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/04/22/elliot_lake_mall_collapse_engineer_faces_safety_charges.html

From:

I don't want to belabor this, so let me just be clear that my comment was addressing only the charges in the celebrity case referenced in the original post.

And I'm thankful that there are twelve people on most juries, instead of just one.

From:

Oh he did it- no doubt of that.

kishenehn wasn't referring to my experience though, but to Roache's victim.

From:

The allegation is now rape, with which he has now been charged and it looks as if there may be more than one count to be taken into consideration.

Edited Date: 2013-05-02 07:39 am (UTC)

(deleted comment)

From:

The media sometimes choose to keep names secret- as they did for a long time with Rolf Harris. I suppose this has a lot to do with the persuasiveness of the lawyers employed by the suspect.

(deleted comment)

From: