What a shock--another one

[jenniren]

Sadly I'm not surprised at all, rumours have been circulating about him for years and I know lots of people in the business have long been expecting something to come out in the press. The wonder is it's taken this long.

[Rodo]

I reckon we need three things -
1) A return to a statute of limitations. Enough of these 20 / 30 / 40 year old cases.
2) Anonymity until charged.
3) A ban on victims making any financial gain, either via the media for a story or from compensation off the perpetrator's estate. It will stop money being a motive. If the perp is guilty, the court sentence should be enough.

Oh yes. We really do need these. It is awful to hear that famous people have had to pay out vast sums of money to clear their name when they hadn't done anything in the first place, while other toerags are making a small fortune out of making false claims with no comeback at all.

[Aggers]

It concerns me that the police seems to be spending more time and money on these matters than
in doing what we pay them to do - namely present-day law enforcement.

[cromwell]

The Police let the BBC know they were raiding Cliff Richards house.
I think there is a danger of trial by media inn cases like this; also a chance that someone who may be guilty will get off because they will successfully argue that the massive publicity, orchestrated by the police, will mean that it is an impossibility for them to get a fair trial.

I felt sorry for Jim Davidson (never thought I'd type that) when he revealed on TV recently that it had cost him £500,000 in legal fees to clear his name.

[KateLMead]

Why does a story about allegations become the top news item?

Are we so infatuated by Celebrity that 'real' news comes second?

I could not agree more. !!

[cromwell]

There was a very good article in the I paper yesterday from a QC., stating unequivocally that the police have ignored due process in this case.
Police codes require that searches by done "with due consideration for the property and privacy" of the occupier". Not the case here, with the BBC tipped off and using a helicopter to film the officers entering Cliff Richard's flat.
Also "the officer in charge of the search shall first try to communicate with the occupier". Again this hasn't been done. Sir Cliff may be in Portugal but if the police can't get in touch with such a well known figure via his agent or whatever, they can't be trying too hard. Cliff Richard only found out about this search when his lawyer rang him up, after seeing it on the TV.
Then, why was a search warrant granted at all? The 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence states that there should be reasonable grounds for believing that an offence has been committed, but also that the is reasonable grounds for believing that there is material on the premises both relevant, and of substantial value". Is that the case here? That there is likely to be evidence in one of Cliff Richards' properties in the south of England, for an alleged indecent offence 25 years earlier, in Sheffield?

This trial by media is going to come back and bite the police before too long. I don't know if Cliff Richard is guilty or innocent but when the police either don't know or choose to ignore their own rules then that's not a good thing.

[TheOstrich]

The South Yorkshire Police are already running for cover, blaming the BBC for pressurising them.

Who is the tail, and who is the dog?

I'm pleased to see the South Yorkshire Police Commissioner taking an active interest in this. And I hope, guilty or not, Cliff Richard sues both organisations for £millions.

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/local/sou ... -1-6790178

[Osc]

And I hope, guilty or not, Cliff Richard sues both organisations for £millions.

Me too - I sincerely hope he is already instructing his lawyers on the basis that any chance of a fair trial, if it comes to that, has been seriously compromised from the very start. Yes, there have always been rumours about him, but I will be extremely shocked if (a) this goes to trial and (b) he is found guilty. Of course, the usual suspects are no doubt jumping on the bandwagon already

[pederito1]

Absolutely disgraceful that they should raid his home in a glare of publicity without even telling him. Known homo of course but I cannot believe he could ever injure a young boy and I think many of the stories of long past incidents are greatly over hyped. I have put my own experience as a 13 year old boy on here several times and I cannot say it bothered me that much, I was only too happy with the rewards it entailed, er pun not intended.