Scott Mills sacked

I agree with you, knspol; the police would have known the age of the complainant at the time, and they said there was insufficient evidence to proceed, then he was assumed to be innocent.
I absolutely agree with your last statement:
Obviously a fine line to tread and I'm in no way condoning any sort of paedophilia but anyone could make a complaint without evidence and someone's life or livelihood could be ruined

I also agree with knspol.
He was apparently neither arrested nor prosecuted so why is he not assumed to have been innocent.
Police have said that they have nothing additional or new and I think that the BBC have either said that they have nothing additional or new or I have assumed it because they have indicated that it was the minorness in the original complaint about the 30 year old incident(s) that caused the sacking presumably being a contract breach or else they would be liable to a lawsuit.
I am indifferent to Mills as a tv Personality so don't have an axe to grind.
I am concerned that people who have not been proven guilty should be presumed innocent.
If Mills has or had a history of additional unacceptable and predatory behaviour the BBC would surely have cited that .
None of this means that I condone abuse of any kind particularly that of adults against children. Like anyone else who is normal I find such abuse abhorrent.

I said earlier that one of my thoughts was that the dismissal was because he did not declare that it was a minor who had made the complaint at the time. In that sense he only told the employer half the story., and it makes no difference whether he was innocent of a crime or not, if he failed to disclose he was in breach of his contract. That’s my best guess.