Cliff Richard

PECS what gives you the right to decide what I believe and what I don't believe. How dare you? I have not labelled you as not having any sympathy for people who are falsely accused.

Of course such things happen but I believe we should all be treated fairly and there is nothing fair about people being allowed to remain anonymous when they have made false accusations. Do you not think the falsely accused should have any rights.

There is something wrong with a person who will make wrong assumptions about another person

I am not envious of his wealth & of course he does not have to do anything he does not want to.
He sought to make a financial recompense for defamation of character/ embarrassment etc. He is a high profile born again Christian. It would be a positive demonstration of his faith & example to others if he donated the money to a charity of his choice..or made a statement to that effect. He may of course have done so.

I feel so sorry for him- he looks so much older. Gloria Hunniford has been such a good friend to him.

Why should he not receive the money because he is wealthy ? I dislike this envy of wealth

For the avoidance of doubt, I think SY police and the BBC behaved appallingly. It was fortunate that CR could afford to sue and he'll be getting his legal fees (about £4m) paid by both organisations I'm sure. And quite frankly, I don't think we've got any right to pass judgement on what he does with any damages he's awarded. It's his money, due because of the terrible behaviour of others and he can do with it what he wants

Nonnie what utter rubbish - no stigma attached to getting raped? Really? Nobody saying 'she's a slag' 'she asked for it; 'look at what she was wearing' 'she'd had too much to drink' 'she probably likes a bit of rough' 'she didn't mean no really'. So you'd be happy for any raped 18 year old dgd of yours to be named in court and stand idly by whilst she was completely destroyed on MSM and social media? It is far more than one person that has been punished for a false accusation. Also there has to be evidence that it really was a false allegation and that is not necessarily clear cut enough in many cases for the person to be prosecuted. As PEGS ays, the balance is still way in any rapists favour and there are thousands and thousands of men walking around free who have committed rape and not had to face justice

Poor Cliff, what a slight on his fautless career.It looks as though it has aged him and it obviously caused major stress for him.

nonnie I think you do not really believe that sexual assault/ power sex exists.
Whilst there are people who make false allegations (& who have been prosecuted) far more are too ashamed or afraid to bring cases. We are not all the same and what you or I might do in a compromising situation may feel impossible for someone else.

I am not sure it is any longer humiliating to go to court for anything. As I said upthread, at the time the law decided that those who complained of sexual offences should remain anonymous there was a stigma attached to it but that is no longer the case. Look at all the celebs who have come out proudly to make claims against Harvey W. It is almost a badge of honour to make such a claim now. Some people use such claims as revenge against an ex-partner who is then branded for life as an abuser even if the case is dropped.

Imo either both accuser and accused should be anonymous or both should be named. The argument that the accused should be named so that others who have been abused works both ways. If the accuser is named then others they have accused can come forward and say so. I have heard of serial accusers. I think it is very unusual for an accuser to be punished but if someone can give me a link to a site showing that many have I will read it. Once before someone said it was common but when I looked it was only one person.

Maryeliza quite so.
Too many women do not bring cases because they fear being humiliated a second time in court. False accusers are trouble twice: once for the person they falsely accuse but also for all the women who lose genuine cases as people then think they are liars.

If someone admits that they made up an accusation then it’s clearly a false accusation but because an accusation can’t be proved doesn’t mean it’s false. Just as if a rape trial ends in a not guilty verdict it doesn’t mean that the accuser was lying. Some people who make genuinely false accusations have been prosecuted and imprisoned and that’s quite right but if you are going to name accusers it could only be when it was established they had made a false accusation either because they had confessed or there was other degfinitive proof. In the CR case we don’t know very much at all do we except the police decided there was not a case to answer. This does not mean it was or it wasn’t a false accusation - we just don’t know.

It seemed that the need for news scoop overtook any common sense by BBC in the Richard case.

If a person makes a malicious allegation of sexual abuse and it is found to be malicious that person can be prosecuted and named & so they should be.

If an allegation is not malicious and remains unproven or the accused is found not guilty of sexual assault due to lack of evidence etc. the person who made the claim must feel dreadful too. Their abuser goes free.

Gossip about celebs is rife. Some gossip is founded, some is not. The police must investigate all accusations and everyone has a responsibility to support victims of assault. That is how Savile et al got away with their sleazy ways because we could not believe St Jim could be bad!

I am, however, sorry that Richard went for money. I understand the need to clear his name as he felt 'violated' etc. But it would have been good for a very wealthy man to simply seek to have his name restored. I hope a good cause is benefitting from the award.

I friend of mine, a very much respected homeopath for many years was accused by a woman of improper touching, another woman came forward with the same allegation, it took a year to clear his name, he no longer practices which is a great loss to this area after so many years . The two women happen to be close friends , one came forward to strengthen the accusation by the first woman. The first woman’s name was in his appointment book, the second wasn’t!

It does happen Fennel, frightening to think how often , but seems we should accept those accused then not charged are really guilty just no evidence

Annie - it happens.
The husband of one of my close friends was a
Primary school teacher. 2 of his pupils accused him of
something indecent. Later they admitted they had made it up. But meanwhile he was suspended, and never went back to teaching.

So anyone should make false accusations, ruin the life of an innocent person ?

Do you mean the accuser should be named if it turns out that it was a false accusation*JE*? It’s not necessarily the case that because there is no evidence that the accusation was false. I think this is a whole lot more complicated than some people seem to think.

+1

Totally agree with you JE

I think we have got to the situation now where the accuser should be named.

We have had too many cases like this one, where false accusations have been made against people in the public eye, which were later found to be completely false.

Actually, come to think of it, not just well known people. There have been cases in the press about men in all sorts of professions having their lives completely torn apart by malicious accusations. Their lives have been ruined, yet the accuser retains their anonymity.

Surely that's so wrong?

Christina Webb, does this mean anything to you Juna

beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1096412&subid=0

I do know of this because I know of a beneficiary

Nandalot he got his knighthood for his charitable works so I would expect that he would. However, he has never boasted about his good works, he prefers to do them by stealth. I did live in Surrey, in an area where he did lots of good things, quietly. I never heard any rumours about him except people suggesting he had been the benefactor when it was anonymous. I am shocked that anyone would suggest such things unless they had proof.

Do you know if he is donating the money to charity?

jura is always quoting her 'friends'. At least Brexit is getting a rest.

On this thread, at least.