I don't intend to comment on any ongoing trial and ask posters not to do so specifically either, but - in a more general way - allow me to comment on circumstances.

Decades ago, times were different. That's obvious. Some people, dead now or still alive, behaved in certain ways. Often, I thought, badly; groping, sneering, laughing, pinching, crossing, I thought at the time, the line of decency. But that was my own "line of decency"... how I felt I should behave. I'm sure I sometimes did or said things I shouldn't have; indeed, quite a few times I said to myself "shouldn't have said that", but I never did it intentionally and always tried to keep within my own moral boundaries.

The legal and morally acceptable boundaries were in very different places then from now, however. "Wandering hands" was the phrase often used to advise people to keep away from some individuals.

Should they be prosecuted NOW for crossing those boundaries? And is it not possible that time may have rendered certain memories inaccurate?

One thing I know from personal experience - media publicity and fame create a very inaccurate situation, provoking claims that are far from the truth, even if those making them, believe them.

I said this fourteen years ago. There are decent, intelligent, normal people who really believed actors and actresses in soap operas were really in prison and called for their release. In fact they were playing characters in fictional story lines. There are still, today, people who truly believe they have been abducted by aliens. The media is very, very powerful in a very, very subtle way.

I do not, repeat NOT, think that all accusers are after money or are intentionally lying. I think the vast majority genuinely believe their claims. And some of them may well be 100% accurate. But "you will be believed" is a dangerous morality for the police and CPS to follow. People do lie, misunderstand, imagine things, get memories confused. And some do want compensation or sympathy or to be a "victim".

For society and justice to ignore this reality is foolish.

I find your opinion on this intriguing JK.

Though I agree with the vast majority of what you say here the thing that leaps out to me (and seems to be a constant in a lot of your posts) is the way in which you constantly refer back to yourself and YOUR vision of how you should behave as 'the divining line' and NOT to that of the laws of the land at that time (or anytime for that matter).

Now, I take on board that we all have a conscience and I accept that most of us set 'boundaries' for ourselves and decide on the point we will 'get off the train' if it goes down a certain track but a lot of what you suggest comes across to me as someone who ALWAYS believes that the morality he sets for himself is ultimately the correct way for all (they either just don't know it yet or can't see it as such).

I feel it is this tendency more than any other that rings alarm bells in those who otherwise would love to give your side of the story the benefit of the doubt...

I say this here JK not to wound, injure, smear or upset you but simply to challenge you to try and see the point I am making, reflect upon it and to give you the opportunity to respond. Believing that you are right and acting accordingly is fine but thinking you KNOW you are right, acting from that 'power base' and thus totally disregarding the law is another thing.

Isn't it?

P.S.) I think the term 'you will be believed' if meant literally IS a dangerous thing. The Police and CPS SHOULD listen to allegations and INVESTIGATE complaints/ take them seriously but anyone accused should ALWAYS remain innocent until PROVEN guilty. Once the balance of justice dictates that a person is GUILTY unless they can prove otherwise we are all lost...

Fair enough Tony but no, no, no; I strongly believe in everyone having their own morality (whether or not it chimes with mine or even, in some cases, the law). Mine is right for me but not for anyone else (example; drugs were not for me but were for almost all my University and music friends when I was a teenager). But my point is; morality was different then; what is now often illegal was not even, in many eyes, immoral then.

For what it's worth, I find your top post in this thread very hard to disagree with. It is measured and prudent and says nothing remotely controversial that I can see. You should be on Newsnight, except of course witch-hunts don't do debates about witch-hunts.

Further questions; we are constantly told that most sex abuse takes place in the family but have such abuse revelations soared since Savile? Seems not. Why not? Can it really only be provoking memories from victims of elderly minor celebrities?
Or, if there HAS been a huge increase in ordinary people being accused, why are we not seeing hundreds of arrests and prosecutions?
Second question - why only similar type celebs? No politicians accused? No rock stars - past or present? No judges or editors? Did we dream about "groupies"? Did they never actually exist?

The big question must be - does publicity only provoke real memories or adapted or invented ones too?

All beautifully said, JK. Wither the likes of the Guardian, driven on by the brave Rusbridger, brandishing his simple sword of truth at all of this madness? I guess if it was happening in America, the Guardian would be campaigning against it non-stop. All strangely quiet and craven closer to home. So much for our liberal journalists.

you are spot on JK.

I reflect back to my yoof before the wars which was spent almost every night in a pub and thence onto a nightclub. Groping and touching were the order of the today..not me of course as I am, amazingly, quite prudish but sexualised groping was accepted as the normal rite of picking up for the night.

Often it failed and many times was successful for people..I of course preferred brilliant chatting up and scintillating wit, hence spent most nights returning home alone to watch the black and white telly..or listen to the wireless.

Now society may have decided that the 50s/60s/70s/80s sort of behaviour is not acceptable today but to now punish people for acting out the social mores of the day is vicious and bizarre and it is media drive.

yet there are limits to who is punished : until 2003 as pointed out so many times The Sun (proprietor : R.Murdoch) urged a generation of young men and their fathers to ogle the breast of young ladies and often, under aged girls.

Today it is considered child pornography yet the producers and publishers and profiteers of that porn escape justice, nay they are Justice as they urge on the WitCh Hunt.

I do not know the solution but more victims will be claimed.