Yeah definitely, if she's lying it's an evil thing to do but if she's telling the truth then I hope she gets some justice. I would imagine a sex crime like this is extremely difficult to prove though so many years after the event

100%.

You would have to think it is extremely unlikely given the time that has passed since the alleged incidents that any Jury could possibly prove beyond a reasonable doubt Mr Roache's guilt.

Methinks another massive NOT guilty verdict and cheers all round before the big lavish Coronation Street return party......

she was "raped" but them met with him again and found her self alone with him in his gaff?


Sorry but unless she was witnesses this aint gonna fly

I thought this too - she claims force for the first incident, and yet, was alone with him again for a second incident? This suggests that both incidents were consentual, in my opinion.

HOWEVER - she was star-struck and underage. This is still illegal. If he did have any sexual activity with her, he is still guilty, as he was a man in his 30s and should have known better.

I dunno, I guess it could have been that she felt she had to do what he said because she was in awe of him and just wanted to be around him but I just don't know if I buy into these accusations... why would you wait 50 odd years?

The latest is that she is claiming another Coronation Street actor, Peter Adamson (deceased) warned her about Mr. Roache and his wicked ways.

a) This is impossible to corroborate and should be completely disregarded
b) This is the same Peter Adamson that lost his job with the street because of the following allegation:

"On 24 April 1983, a Sunday newspaper reported that Adamson had been arrested for indecently assaulting two eight-year old girls in a public swimming pool in Haslingden where he had assisted as a part-time instructor. One was allegedly assaulted the day before, the other on 16 April. The police complaint alleged that Adamson's hands had strayed while giving the girls swimming lessons.
He was represented by the barrister George Carman QC, who had a prominent career defending celebrities. On 26 July 1983, a Crown Court jury found Adamson not guilty. The following year, after his wife's death and still suffering financial woes and drinking problems, he was allegedly persuaded by freelance Sun reporter Dan Slater to change his story following several bottles of whisky. Adamson was alleged to have told Slater "I am totally guilty of everything the police said"...."But what I hope you will print - there was no sexual intent."
As a result, Lincolnshire Police interviewed Adamson who categorically denied the confession. No charges were made against him."

Courts: He is not guilty of All Charges


On all news now


http://news.sky.com/story/1207537/wi...ict-not-guilty


http://media.skynews.com/media/image...-1-626x352.jpg

Great!

Hopefully the same outcome for DLT and Rolf Harris. I hate bad outcomes regarding these situations.

Of course, the accuser will retain her anonimity while Roache's reputation is smeared forever and his career is probably over. There will be people who assume that there's no smoke without fire, so he's damned for all time. It's a sad state of affairs.

ITV should put him back in the soap

Great news, bring back Ken Barlow asap

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...e_2813812d.jpg


He has just spoken Live on all TVNews and Radio

he wants to get back to work aged 81

Great news he has been proven innocent by a Jury so that is an end to it. Bring back Ken and his Kimono.

Great outcome, but sad this means he will be returning to Corrie :/

Honestly, I think the majority of accusations now are simply for the compensation. Thats not to say there arent some genuine victims out there, but I fully believe that most of them are liars and just after cash. No way would thousands of people keep quiet for 50 years or whatever then decide to come out

I was thinking this, I think it's going to happen a lot more in the future sadly.

Yes the Legal Deals tempt so many

Looks like this is exactly what happened........struggling to understand how 6 different woman can suddenly remember these alleged incidents. Their memories were probably jogged by the publicity surrounding the Jimmy Savile case.

What is harder to understand is how the DPP decided this was ever a prosecutable case............?????

There has to be a time limit on this stuff......If a surgeon messes up an operation , theres a limit on the time window in which you can take legal action. Id say the same should apply to rape. 48 years later is ust absurd. how on earth is everyone supposed to recall every tiny detail ? now there was no concrete evidence here, Roache hasnt come off well out of all this mind. But rapist? no. also IF some of the charges were totally make believes and packed with lies, then those false accusers should be put on trial too

Great news

Sadly I have to agree. This is such damaging stuff. Something needs to change. Protection until found guilty.

I am so pleased that Bill was found NOT guilty and I have been rooting for him all along. He is a fine example of what dignigty is all about. I also agree with your comments Vicky and whilst it will be a sad day for those who were genuinely abused in their younger years and feel they will not be believed years later, it is the avalanche of those jumping on the Jimmy saville bandwagon that is making it difficult for them to speak out.

Reckon he might have been seen as a bit of an easy target as well because he's got a bit of a seedy reputation and is known for having slept around a lot

Though I can't help but find the whole thing suspicious still, with Michael Le Vell there was only one accuser whereas here there were five, none of whom knew each other. Just strange they would all come together spontaneously to make these allegations and all of them lying :shrug:

Norris Cole touched me