Yet again John Leslie has his reputation besmirched after earlier allegations wrecked his TV career.

What will happen to his accuser for making false allegations and the police who leak this stuff to the media all the time without any thought of the concequences ?..nothing of course.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1037516/Relief-
Relief for John Leslie as police drop latest rape probe

John Leslie will not be charged over the latest rape allegation made against him, police said today.

The former Blue Peter presenter was arrested last month after a woman claimed he had attacked her thirteen years ago.

But this evening police dropped the investigation following advice from the Crown Prosecution Service.
Leslie, dramatically acquitted of two counts of indecent assault in 2003 but ruined professionally by the sex scandal, said there had been 'little justice and no fairness' in the latest probe.

A statement from his lawyers said: 'Yet again, after a complete and thorough investigation, it has been confirmed that there is no truth or substance to the damaging allegations that were made against our client.
'He is of course delighted. The complaint was ridiculous, but yet again and for a second time his name has been dragged through the mud before the law has had a chance to confirm his innocence.

'The law confers a blanket of anonymity on complainants but the accused enjoys no such protection.

'Instead his reputation, his character, his career and his family are regarded as fair game by the media.

'There is little justice and no fairness in what our client and his family have been put through.'

I'm only surprised this sort of thing doesn't happen much more often as I predicted 8 years ago when it happened to me (but when everyone assumed it had to be true).

The LAW must change in the following ways

1. Historical Allegations should only be accepted if they are made within 5 years of the complaint or if a child by 5 years after the age of consenst ( 21 yrs old) to be considered a criminal case.

2. Any allegation must not carry ANON status because this is totally unfair. If someone wants justice they should not be afraid of this. If they genuinely want justice then they should not be afraid of their name being attached. There should be proper scrutiny of that person - in the same way that the "alleged" is scrutinised.

Until this happens the LAW is not only unjust - it is a charter for CRIMINALS to settle scores and fraudulently claim compensation.

If you want to win several thousand pounds then make an allegation of sexual abuse/rape - you need no evidence - and then claim your winnings. Just make it plausible ( eg you need to know or have met the person preferably )

The CRIMINALS have taken over our LEGAL SYSTEM. It is time for the decent people of the UK to TAKE IT BACK.

The brief mention of this story about Mr Leslie in the Times today, assuming that you had a magnifying glass was a disgrace.

In film credit terms, this is the equivalent of sticking the best boys mate, who knew him a bit, but might have been out with his sister, and showed up occasionally, on the bottom of the list just after everybody has left and got an ice cream.

Well knock me down with a feather, I have just written more words than the Times managed to do on the subject.

Shocking.
Why are apologies or disclaimers in this countries` media written out in a fibre-optic pen as opposed to an indelible marker??

Yes, tiny tiny coverage of this as opposed to massive coverage of the accusations.

Why?

Because they were a GOOD STORY; this is NOT a good story.