I know nothing and therefoore will make no comment except to say... 23 years ago I discovered, thanks to Max Clifford and Surrey Police, that there is a way celebrities can be attacked, for whatever reason. Start a rumour. Cover it in the media. Inflate and colour it a bit. Publicity will always provoke other, similar allegations (especially if the subject is dead but, more imortant, if the victim is famous and therefore, probably, wealthy). This trick CAN be used locally, with local media for less celebrated people like vicars, teachers, doctors, fosters or priests. But TV or radio people are a better bet.
And it's hard to prove innocence.

While the passing of time does not excuse the crime, I am quite uncomfortable about punishing people for things that may have happened forty years ago.

If rehabilitation is the aim of prison, how can it help if someone has already rehabilitated themselves?

I don't know what the alternative could be, but it just doesnt feel right, for many cases.

Never heard of him. Hardeep seems an oddball.

Honey wrote:
While the passing of time does not excuse the crime, I am quite uncomfortable about punishing people for things that may have happened forty years ago.

If rehabilitation is the aim of prison, how can it help if someone has already rehabilitated themselves?

I don't know what the alternative could be, but it just doesnt feel right, for many cases.

I don't think the passage of time should be a factor taken into consideration either way.

If rehabilitation is the aim of the criminal justice system we should greatly scale down the use of prison sentences, and only for the most proven dangerous.

How dangerous they are is not necessarily linked to how long ago offences were committed. Locking people up, in whatever institution, is inimicable to rehabilitation. But not doing so, like open borders, politically toxic. Or perceived to be.

If we actually wish to reduce crime we need to invest in Police forces who are allowed to pro actively Police; because study after study shows it is not the severity of punishment which deters, but the perceived likelihood of being caught.

We need Police on the street taking all levels of crime seriously and that means trying to prevent it. But the Government gave up on preventing crime years ago, and now largely makes budget decisions against what grade of crime to bother responding to at all. After the event.

As for the chap concerned, never heard of him and haven't read the stories.