Jim Davidson Will Not Face Any Charges

[ChillDoubt]

says Sky News and BBC tickers.

Wonder if any of the others will follow suit?

[jim360]

So long as it's sorted out quickly, and those who deserve to face charges in court do so, that's what matters. This constant cat-and-mouse like arresting and bailing and re-arresting with nothing happening is not really healthy for all concerned.

[sir.prize]

Did you say 'sorted out quickly' jim360?

Freddie Starr was arrested last November 1st.

[pixie373]

Is it legal to be a total Salad Bowl?

[pixie373]

^^Not quite what i put

[sir.prize]

That is five who were arrested who have now been told no charges will be made against them, including DJ Mike Osman who was also arrested way back in January.

[jim360]

That's why I'm moaning, sir.prize!

[mikey4444]

I think that this business has shown that we need a debate on the naming of individuals before they are charged and appear in court.

I am not a fan of Jim Davison by any means but he is now saddled with a reputation for the rest of life because of innuendo and rumour. He has or soon will be, hung, drawn and slaughtered in the media, without any evidence being presented. I find that disturbing to say the least.

[Dusty Bin]

Publishing the names of arrested celebrities does encourage previously silent victims to come forward. Should we try to stop this?

[mikey4444]

Dusty...I have a certain amount of sympathy in what you say but it seems a very blunt tool to use if the Police are trying to get evidence. If we used that principle, than our TV, Radio and newspapers would be full of requests from the Police to "help them with their enquiries" and very little else. After all, many thousands of people are arrested every day for all sorts of offences but they are not named by the Police.

Celebrities are being named by the police because it saves them the trouble of investigating properly. Some of these current celebrities were arrested months and months ago and have been living in limbo ever since.

[Octavius]

Also, guilty or not their careers are scuppered or at least suspended for a period (not that this is any problem for me where Jim D is concerned). I think people still attach Matthew Kelly with this sort of thing from 10 years ago, even though no evidence against him was found (apart from possession of some foo foo dust).

[pixie373]

That's exactly right, octavius. I thought Matthew Kelly had got in trouble, but no idea whether he was guilty of anything or not. Just associate it with his name.

[mikey4444]

Its indicative of the very problem that were discussing that we remember Matthew Kelly for that strange, unexplained affair, rather than all his years as a TV presenter. I really think that we need that debate I was talking about earlier.

[Orderlimit]

'Celebrities are being named by the police because it saves them the trouble of investigating properly. ' Where on earth have you got that from???. Also, have you any idea how large these investigations are?.

[brionon]

The Guardian went crazy when the lover of one of their journalists was held for 9 hours. I wonder what they'll have to say about this !!!

[FredPuli43]

Jim Davidson himself, on Sky News, was at pains to say that the police had a job to do, they had received complaints and had no option, that these matters take a long time to investigate thoroughly, and he had no complaint about the police whatsoever.

Who says that celebrities are being named by the police because it saves them the time of investigating properly ?

[sandyRoe]

He can be magnanimous now that the prospect of court has disappeared. To say that there is no realistic prospect of a conviction is similar to the Scottish verdict, 'Not proven'.

[Gromit]

The CPS don't think there is sufficient evidence to get a conviction, so Davidson's reputation is restored.

It does seem odd that many women who have no connection to one another have made the same false allegations, including one in the far south Atlantic. Perhaps it is some sort of syndrome?