And meanwhile there was a case on the news today of a school teacher whose assaults on boys were in 1959. He was convicted. Whether the accused is famous or not, the case is only as good as the evidence turns out to be. Sometimes, even after a long lapse of time, it is so good that the defendant pleads guilty. What is reprehensible is arresting and bailing defendants, whoever they are, and leaving them on bail for months without charge. If there is a reasonable suspicion, sufficient to justify an arrest, it might be thought that that suspicion would be confirmed or not within a couple of weeks. As it is, and this practice is highlighted because the suspects are famous, it seems that there is an arrest and bail while the police hunt around for any scraps of evidence. If the suspicion is founded on a woman's complaint, why on Earth can her statement not form the basis of an immediate charge? If she's not to be believed then don't charge.