cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Enter what you see:
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage Tip: Reload page if you have difficulty reading characters
Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home
Anonymity for victims of false allegations? PDF Print E-mail
Friday, 20 March 2015
In principle this sounds like a major breakthrough. But I fear it's just another red herring, intended to avoid examination of the real problem.

Way back in 2000, when this loophole in the judicial system was spotted, that allegations did NOT need evidence to lead to convictions, police simply arrested celebrities and got the media publicity needed - as can be seen in the cases of Mick Hucknall and Paul Weller - Google "Hucknall Rape" and see.

But, to be safer, in my case they decided to arrest and immediately charge me - although they were well aware of the spurious nature of the claims, as they were certain they would get other allegations.

Those initial false claims against me never made it to trial.

And, indeed, most of the other fake claims were eventually dropped too.

So police, if told not to release celebrity (and other) names to the media in order to prompt other allegations, will simply charge after arrest and abandon those first claims in due course, if necessary.

The media then still gets its "great story". The cops still get publicity to achieve their high profile convictions and appear to obey the House of Commons recommendations. The falsely accused still end up in prison. Result for Satan.

 
< Prev   Next >