Another Court Case For Rape Where The Victims Names

[trt]

are not disclosed, but the accused is!

One is 62 now and it happened to her when she was 15, something is not right here!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540555/Coronation-Street-star-Bill-Roache-court-child-sex-trial.html

[jno]

what's not right?

[boxtops]

Why isn't it right? Young women and girls were not taken seriously, or frightened to speak out about a big name, in the past - only now do they feel their voices will be heard?

[ummmm]

Some of us risk sounding like a broken record.

Back then a lot of sexual abuse was swept under the carpet. The victims often felt that they wouldn't be believed.

Roache is 81 now...maybe she wanted justice before he died.

[ToraToraTora]

jno being obtuse again, how surprising.

Both or neither I don't mind which.

[andy-hughes]

trt - Mr Roache may not be pleased to hear this - but you and I and everyone else, inclduing the victims of abuse, will be delighted to know that -

there is no time limit on bringing abusers to justice.

I don't care if this lady is 102 - she is entitled to justice if abuse if proved - that is the way justice works.

I think if she, or anyone else heard someone say that 'It was all a long time ago ...' she would be justified in losing her temper to its maximum.

[jno]

I just want to hear which the OP thinks is not right, TTT.

[mccfluff]

"something is not right here! "

you are absolutely right - that it took so long before she was able to speak up/taken seriously, that's what wasn't right

[Zeuhl]

Bill Roache prompted at least one of these Complainants when he gave a television interview in which he put forward some dubious points of view

///He "caused outrage by appearing to defend stars who sleep with underage girls – and claiming sex abuse victims are paying the price for their behaviour in “previous lives”.

And he said of the victims: “If you accept that you are pure love, and if you know that you are pure love and therefore live that pure love, these things won’t happen to you.”

The remark prompted interviewer Garth Bray to ask: “To some people that sounds perhaps like you’re saying victims bring things on themselves – is that what you’re saying?”

Roache replied: “Not quite, but then yes I am, because everything that happens to us has been a result of what we have been in previous lives.”///

A risky strategem for someone with his 'I've slept with 1000 women' track record.

[FredPuli43]

It's the law.There are restrictions on the publication of the name of alleged victims in sexual offences, for their protection; as there are for children and young persons in cases

[douglas9401]

Some might say that in the interest of balance,fairness and transparency, the law as it stands should be reviewed.

[youngmafbog]

I know you think the law is the be all and end all Fred but sometimes it is an ass and sometimes it is plain wrong.

Innocent until proven guilty, except when the media can try you and spatter your picture over the papers it it seems.

As TTT says, both or neither, especially when so much time has passed.

[naomi24]

If she's made an allegation, she should be named. She's not a child now - she's 62.

[jno]

who exactly is disadvantaged by the suppression of this witness's name? If Roache doesn't know who she is he will have an opportunity to say so.

[Zeuhl]

There is an imbalance in that the Defendant's identity is revealed

but concealing that would prevent other witnesses coming forward

[trt]

## If she's made an allegation, she should be named. She's not a child now - she's 62. ##

Precisely naomi, spot on!

Thats what not right!

[naomi24]

Roche is disadvantaged. Before he's judged guilty or otherwise his name is in the public domain. She is making an allegation against a potentially innocent man and therefore her name should also be in the public domain. She is not a child. Why the protection?

[jno]

I don't think you should suppress defendants' names. If these ones get more publicity than other people would, it's because they've always got more publicity than other people, and have courted it. It doesn't mean his trial will be unfairer than anyone else's.

[naomi24]

*Roache*

[Ken4155]

jno; Almost every person accused of rape has his name made public, whether he is in the public eye or not.

[ummmm]

How many people wouldn't come forward if they were going to be named in the press? I know I wouldn't...