You will NOT be believed. Police say "lack of evidence". Since when has there been ANY evidence in sex cases? One person's word against another's. Unless there is physical damage (frequently self inflicted by false accusers).

and in the Ched Evans case, his word against her total (convenient) amnesia.

what is becoming clear to me that many of those who go to the cops should be shown the door as their claims are so patently false...but of course they have all been told : "you will be believed"

Here is the court document with the claims against Prince Andrew.

It's bizarre and seems written by 2 hack lawyers (no wonder Dershowitz is going to rip them apart)

eg : it claims Andrew had sex with the claimant when she was "underaged" (have never read an official document that says 'underage") except the very document proves she was the legal age in the 3 places claimed.

Even if true and Andrew did sleep with her, it was legal where it happened.

## a reason why the hysterical tabloid reporting is just clap trap- Andrew cannot & will not be investigated by UK police

tompride.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/epsteindershowitz.pdf

It is slowly but surely creeping towards the "anonymity for accused" stage which I'm not convinced by. Yes, if I hadn't been named and publicised the false accusers would never have come forward. The problem of being a celebrity. But I think it's police behaviour and CPS morality that need examining and changing. Police should investigate fairly, rejecting false allegations and strongly prosecuting those made for financial gain or revenge or a desire for attention (whilst not doing so for the genuinely deluded, mistaken or mad). Instead of going for the "high profile conviction", they should work towards finding the truth. They must return to being ON THE SIDE of the honest. And CPS, likewise, should stop going for successful convictions and concentrate of honest and true ones.