Quote:
Originally Posted by joeysteele
I agree with Livia as to the anonymity of the accusers and Bill Roache having this smear set alongside him for good now.
I think naming the person facing the allegations may well bring others who have been abused to come forward.
Sadly however,I also think,in cases like this one, that it could bring out people to also accuse who have no substance at all to their accusations but maybe to try to settle scores with someone.
Clearly this jury,only needing 6 hours time too,did not believe any of the accusers and for em that is good enough, justice has it seems been done in this case and I hope Bill Roache and his family can now get back to some normality.
I also think and wish it is was so too, that when someone has faced allegations such as this and have then fought a trial against them and then been found 'not guilty',that those who were the accusers then lose their anonymity at that stage and are named.
I think the public need to know who those acusers were and be protected against them making any false accusations against anyone else.
|
As much as I agree with your sentiments I personally do not think the accusers should lose their anonymity as it may be possible in some cases they were raped but there was not enough evidence to prove it so the victim would have gone through all that personal pain and humiliation for nothing and now face the prospect of being publicly named and accused of being a liar.
Also as they would not be believed in any future incidents they might become easy prey for sexual predators who know their previous history. Any future jury would be even less inclined to believe her story if she had already been publicly discredited and branded a liar on a previous occasion.