Cliff Richard - shock!

Anyway, Nonu, you could always Google him...(or use whatever search engine you have, of course!)

Police contacted the BBC but not Cliff Richard

Have never been a fan- but it does seem he has been treated very badly. What happens to innocent till proven guilty and access to a fair trial?

I think it would be quite difficult to get a search warrant without due cause.
Just saying.

From my own experience I would say that a search warrant can be granted with very little cause.

feetlebaum are you the spelling police. Richard or Richards, you knew who I was posting about.

I have been told on good authority it IS quite hard to get a search warrant.
What does seem a trifle bizzare to me though that the raid took place when he was not there.
Just saying!!

Thank you for that info Granny23 - I wasn't aware that he had signed a document asking Scotland 'not to go'; as you say, a bit hypocritical when he's gone and done it himself!

Good grief - I'm going to have to agree 100% with GrannyTwice's post as well!

I am sad to read the innuendos about CR just because he has chosen to live alone and not go in graphic detail about his personal life.

In days gone by we had what was called confirmed bachelors and maiden aunts and we did not speculate about their sexuality.

I remember once how the wonderful astronomer Patrick Moore was questioned quite inappropriately about his life as a single man. He answered quickly I lost my fiancée in the 2nd WW and there was no one else for me - end of story.

I truly hope this is all resolved very quickly and Cliff proved innocent.

Well it has nothing to do with his sexual orientation, if it had it would not make news as too boring, but the suggestion is paedophile that is the issue.

I imagine the gay community must be getting very tired of the automatic assumption that if someone is gay they may well be a paedophile. In the minds of the tabloids the two seem to be inseparable.

Yes dee I agree.

Hollydaze

The response to this latest 'scandal' seems to be overwhelmingly pro-Cliff who is now being portrayed as a rather noble victim.

Can't see it going anywhere. Too well connected and wealthy.

I do realise he may very well be innocent of course.

I do not think that their names should be splashed over newspapers and this includes Joe Bloggs, until proven guilty because mud sticks.

I absolutely agree with you Charleygirl - none of it should be reported until it has been properly investigated.

Disgrace, innocent until proved guilty.

In total agreement with last few posts. There should be no publicity until someone is actually charged.

We've had similar debates to this before and several issues seem to be being conflated. I agree that in general it seems wrong to publicise the searching of someone's property. However, once someone is arrested, publicity can bring forth other victims which can facilitate the person being charged. This is often the case in situations when individual women have not been believed about a rape but publicity has led to the person being charged and subsequent conviction. A recent example was John Worboys the black cab serial rapist who would not have been charged without the publicity which led to a worker in a rape crisis centre remembering a similar earlier case, IIRC

Truth be told :-
a] There is no smoke without fire.

b] Mud sticks I am afraid .

But we should be careful to

a) not generate more smoke in an already overheated smoke generating machine by throwing on unseasoned wood (ie, contributing to rumours and believing them without confirmation).

b) not throw any mud until we are certain that the target is a legitimate one. It sticks to the thrower's hands too, and dirties them.

Mud washes off too, or it dries and brushes off. Just saying. Mud is so misunderstood!

GrannyTwice your comment "once someone is arrested, publicity can bring forth ......." is the one that matters. There has been no arrest (so far).

The article from The Independent that Aka linked above on Saturday discusses the police codes with regard to a search warrants and charges - these codes are in place to protect all of us.

I was really surprised to see in that article the comment about the time limits on such cases in most European countries. Isn't it peculiar how you (or I anyway!) just assume that what happens in the UK must apply everywhere!?

Mrsjones- I wasn't talking about CR but about basic principles as other posters were doing the same. I was talking about the UK because all of this is happening in the UK - if we want a discussion about different systems in different countries, then that's another thread. I said I thought there was an issue about publicity about searches but the discussion had moved onto arresting and charging so I was also addressing those issues

That surprised me too mrsjones and I like your point bout us assuming that what happens in the UK must apply elsewhere.

Actually G2 if people want to discuss systems in different countries, and how the laws against abuse are different it's ok to do so. I've just checked GN guidelines and that's not listed