When they eventually find a Chairperson, will said person be even handed and also Inquiring into Victims of False Allegations like Starr, Gambo, Davidson, Tarbie, Roach, Le Vell and the hundreds of wrongly convicted victims of that heinous crime? Will they be hearing evidence from those falsely accused victims of lies, exaggerations, inventions, inflations and greed? Surely they will? Won't they?

I only ask because nobody seems to be mentioning them. Oh, I know being hounded by police, CPS and media for years is nowhere near as harmful as getting your bum pinched 40 years ago, but surely all victims need to be heard?

So when we hear those fine lawyers screaming that the Chairman must listen to victims, we absolutely agree. All victims, not just one small area of victims.

And not just celebrities. Teachers who lost their jobs. Foster parents. Vicars and priests. Doctors. And dead people whose reputations might be trashed in the future by people making fake claims, for whatever reasons.

If a Chairperson is appointed who has links to genuine victims of abuse I'm sure they will also be hounded out of office before starting the job. Someone's sister in law was once groped by a footballer? They must be deemed ineligible.

I suppose it's ridiculous to suggest scrapping the entire pointless exercise and sending the millions that will be wasted on this Inquiry (which will inevitably find yes, there is child abuse and yes, there are false allegations and yes, they are both dreadful and should be stopped) to West Africa and used to save peoples' lives?

I quote the great late former Premier of NSW Nevile Wran QC known as Nifty Nev during his tenure (as seen below in Hedda's beautiful snap with the late artist Martin Sharp of OZ Magazine fame whom Neville as a young barrister successfully defended in the first Oz obscenity trail- both are now with God):

he uttered these famous and unforgettable words :
"Never start a Royal Commission or official Inquiry unless you already know the results."!! proved time and time again to be right.

as evidenced by the current Oz Royal Commission into institutional child abuse..now going on and on who claimed a 'victim'- the very ex-detective who lit he fire..a rabid 'pedo hysteric' who was found to be lying & falsely accusing a number of Catholic faith detectives of being in a cabal that covered up priestly child abuse and then- several victims jumped onboard and claimed he had "used them".

I look forward to this Inquiry & I'm getting in the popcorn. It could go in any dangerous direction.

JK2006 wrote:
And dead people whose reputations might be trashed in the future by people making fake claims, for whatever reasons.There is a case where a dead teacher has been accused by a particularly voluble male accuser in newspaper, radio and TV interviews. The teacher was never charged. The accuser didn't emerge as an abuse victim until after seeing a documentary featuring older former pupils from his school who said they had been abused by other teachers. The dead teacher's name (and photograph) appears online only in connection with that accuser and his accusations.

And it's perfectly acceptable that both victims should be examined - claimed abuse victim and possible falsely accused victim - and if no evidence can be found, the false accuser should be prosecuted, even if his victim is dead. Likewise, if it is shown that his claims are genuine, then the (dead) perpetrator should be named and shamed. But there must be proof and both sides must be examined (lie detectors etc).