Another poor BBC old presenter.

Quicker to arrest anyone, that ever appeared on BBC TV! Quite ridiculous. The call for a law that states, anything that was supposed to have happened 40+ years ago, should not be followed up, 40 years on, as times have changed & so have peoples minds & memories. Utter claptrap & a waste of police time & our money. Just arrest a certain ex-Detective, NOW!

Not just arrested, now charged.

And the final verdict will be?

Case dismissed due to lack of evidence. Notuce it says Indecent Assault, not Sexual Assault. What's he supposed to have done? Put his arm round them, too friendly? The mind boggles.

bh wrote:
anything that was supposed to have happened 40+ years ago, should not be followed up



Why not 10 - or 30 years?!!

If the crime is serious, does the passing of time matter?

And should we not use our new discoveries - DNA etc. ?

The first person to announce both "stages" - why, our old mate Tosspot of course! Still flaunting his secret connections.

40 years ago. Absolutely absurd. Who did he assault - a forgetful snail?

Chris Retro wrote:
The first person to announce both "stages" - why, our old mate Tosspot of course! Still flaunting his secret connections.
Obviously he didn't learn from his Rolf Harris whistle & didn't really give a toss, anyway. The man has no scruples.

And to Mary: What use is DNA in a 38 year old case? Did the woman & Mr Hall keep all their clothes from 1974 & remain unwashed? Doubtful!

Oh Mary, Mary quite CONNED-trary.

bh wrote:
What use is DNA in a 38 year old case?

A great deal of use!

For example, google the 1957 Pretty Maria case in Illinois; despite a 55 year gap, DNA led to the murderer, just a couple of months ago.

Similar cases are all over the world.



Time limits in serious crimes are wrong; even if the victim is dead (as in the Pretty Maria case), new DNA techniques can lead to the guilty.

Mary wrote:

A great deal of use!
new DNA techniques can lead to the guilty.

I wouldn't put too much faith in it If I were you !


Police store DNA with food -

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/8182707.stm

Police store DNA with ice cream -

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8125317.stm

Reclaim YOUR DNA -
reclaimyourdna.org

STOP THE DATABASE STATE -

Would YOU trust your personal sensitive data
to an organisation that has already LOST the
personal data of HALF of the UK population?
www.no2id.net

bh wrote:
What use is DNA in a 38 year old case?

and even if the storage - after 38 years ! - has been exemplary, this would cause some concern -

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”

New York Times - www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/science/18dna.html?_r=3

but Mary..how could DNA be used against someone when they are accused of fiddling or groping with a claimant 20 years ago?

the reason there are time limits on cases is because of people's memories fade. In these cases- there is no evidence (certainly not DNA)..just one persons word against another.

Witness a ratbag MP who a few days ago named a formally accused in Parliament after the prosecution dropped the case.

Only in sexual hysteria cases would this happen. The MP even said he could not think of any reasons the claimants would accuse someone if it wasn't true.

The MP should be taken out and horsewhipped. Fortunately for him, that doesn't happen.

very few cases involve DNA, and a case where one person merely says something happened would not involve DNA at all. Where DNA is used, it often needs other evidence on top.

Prior to his arrest there were rumours he was trying to revive his career with a new vehicle that was basically a re-hash of an old show working title was "Its a cock out!"

CONtrary Mary.

What about the thousands of VICTIMS falsely accused (plus their suffering families & friends) over the years wrongly imprisoned far too often - FOR YEARS ?!

Mary wrote:
despite a 55 year gap, DNA led to the murderer

Undisputed fact

CONtraversialView wrote:
CONtrary Mary.

What about the thousands of VICTIMS falsely accused (plus their suffering families & friends) over the years wrongly imprisoned far too often - FOR YEARS ?!

but in these cases it's said by the child abuse industry : better a hundred innocent are convicted rather than one guilty go free,

Tio wrote:
Mary wrote:
despite a 55 year gap, DNA led to the murderer

Undisputed fact(


... till it gets to the Appeal Court ?

CONtrary Mary.

but in these cases it's said by the child abuse industry : better a hundred innocent are convicted rather than one guilty go free,

What age do people transform from children to adults? .. What age do they cease to matter?

What if one of the innocent convicted is your son or daughter or spouse or parent?? Or, that if that innocent convicted is you?