Trial by news channels and TV

[Chris Ashdown]

This as got ridiculous, nothing short of vigilantes with the present system of naming or loosely describing people of crimes by reporters or documentaries etc when a person has not been charged with any crime.

2 Massive cases recently where people have been hounded out of their work prior to any charges by the police

Not aided by accusers making claims years after the supposed crime was committed , leaving little chance of defending the claim after so many years, there should be a reasonable timeframe say 5 years to make a claim to the police, which would be fair to both sides

We need a massive change in the law to ensure only those found guilty by a court are named or given hints to who they are

Reporters have a job to do but their present methods should be banned by law, and massive fines given to defendant's who are innocent until proven guilty

Directors should also be named on companies who hide facts that should have been reported to the police be it TV , Radio or other organisations like the NHS. at present they just hide known or reported worries with no punishment when they get it wrong

Sorry for the rant
Still a great Forum

 

[Mark T Jones]

Indeed.

Russel Brand just being the most recent - makes me deeply uncomfortable

He may of course be the abusive, bullying paedo the media have decided to tell us, in which case the courts should decide and a judge should sentence him accordingly.

Unfortunately a fair trial is now nigh on impossible. He has been found guilty by some journalists and a 'jury' of viewers who already knew he was guilty because he's 'a bit annoying' or ' not remotely funny'.

 

[IanSuth]

Playing devils advocate there is another side of the coin with historic sex cases.

There are I am sure many cases where victims were so shamed they did not come fwd. It takes one person standing up for the others to feel the courage to also come fwd. Without some publicity that doesnt happen.

I speak form experience here - i was at a boarding school in the 80's, whilst i was there there was a master we all called Paedo Webb, when he was caught with hands in a 13year old's bed he was just made to leave (it was even in the paper headlined "Goodbye Mr Chips" as he was a longstanding woodwork teacher said to be leaving "for personal reasons"). The school just shipped people on to try and keep their name unsullied

Many many years later someone undergoing therapy actually was persuaded to make a Police complaint about another teacher, that started an avalanche of people coming forward with evidence (including contemporary diary entries etc) which led to several court cases relating to activities by different teachers with both underage male and female pupils. I think there are currently 5 inside serving sentences related to those offences (may be 4 as one is due for release some when around now).

So whilst trial by media is rubbish and unfair on the innocent - total suppression of accusations can be at least as bad and lead to further victims

 

[Chris Ashdown]

Playing devils advocate there is another side of the coin with historic sex cases.

There are I am sure many cases where victims were so shamed they did not come fwd. It takes one person standing up for the others to feel the courage to also come fwd. Without some publicity that doesnt happen.

I speak form experience here - i was at a boarding school in the 80's, whilst i was there there was a master we all called Paedo Webb, when he was caught with hands in a 13year old's bed he was just made to leave (it was even in the paper headlined "Goodbye Mr Chips" as he was a longstanding woodwork teacher said to be leaving "for personal reasons"). The school just shipped people on to try and keep their name unsullied

Many many years later someone undergoing therapy actually was persuaded to make a Police complaint about another teacher, that started an avalanche of people coming forward with evidence (including contemporary diary entries etc) which led to several court cases relating to activities by different teachers with both underage male and female pupils. I think there are currently 5 inside serving sentences related to those offences (may be 4 as one is due for release some when around now).

So whilst trial by media is rubbish and unfair on the innocent - total suppression of accusations can be at least as bad and lead to further victims

So you could say the damage was caused by the directors/ headmaster of the school not informing the police, and they have had a great pension and retirement as a pillar of society

 

[Mark T Jones]

Playing devils advocate there is another side of the coin with historic sex cases.

There are I am sure many cases where victims were so shamed they did not come fwd. It takes one person standing up for the others to feel the courage to also come fwd. Without some publicity that doesnt happen.

I speak form experience here - i was at a boarding school in the 80's, whilst i was there there was a master we all called Paedo Webb, when he was caught with hands in a 13year old's bed he was just made to leave (it was even in the paper headlined "Goodbye Mr Chips" as he was a longstanding woodwork teacher said to be leaving "for personal reasons"). The school just shipped people on to try and keep their name unsullied

Many many years later someone undergoing therapy actually was persuaded to make a Police complaint about another teacher, that started an avalanche of people coming forward with evidence (including contemporary diary entries etc) which led to several court cases relating to activities by different teachers with both underage male and female pupils. I think there are currently 5 inside serving sentences related to those offences (may be 4 as one is due for release some when around now).

So whilst trial by media is rubbish and unfair on the innocent - total suppression of accusations can be at least as bad and lead to further victims

There is a clear argument for encouraging victims to come forward, and for ensuring that complaints are properly investigated and taken seriously.

That's a big leap from this trial by media.

At present the verdict seems to be split between

GUILTY - because he's a bit creepy and I don't find him funny

or
INNOCENT - because he's actually quite funny, takes the piss out of people I don't like & has fought drug addiction.

 

[MikeJ]

Four different women have accused him of sexual assault and rape, over a period of seven years.

Yeah, let's just let him carry on working and not mention it, in case it brings out anyone else that may have suffered.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

Four different women have accused him of sexual assault and rape, over a period of seven years.

Yeah, let's just let him carry on working and not mention it, in case it brings out anyone else that may have suffered.

I don't know if he is innocent or guilty, I do know that if he is innocent then the media have ruined his life for the next 50 or thereabout years( i don't know his age),

The only way we will know for sure is by the law, not trial by innuendo, TV, or other media outlets.

No doubt Mike , you would be ruined if I made a unsubstantiated claim about you based upon your argument and phoned the false story to the press

 

[MikeJ]

Well the press would do some checking to see if it was true, and I'd sue you for defamation. If you could find three other people to come up with a story about me, and find medical records to back up your claim, then I'd be worried.

Has Brand sued Channel 4 for defamation?

 

[IanSuth]

So you could say the damage was caused by the directors/ headmaster of the school not informing the police, and they have had a great pension and retirement as a pillar of society

It was caused totally by the school (like the church - and one convicted paedo was the school chaplain who was tied to the bishop of chichester who was done for for similar) trying to protect it's name over the welfare of it's pupils.

As it was a charity school parents (or more usually a single parent) were basically threatened that if it came out they would lose the place at the school.

As soon as the first actual police investigation became public the floodgates opened and last i saw there were over 90 complainants against 12 staff spanning 40+ years

There was no legal duty of care for schools / teachers to inform others of allegations until after soham

 

[IanSuth]

Sorry checked and 11 staff convicted including 3 chaplains covering incidents in period of 1969-2014 - most were in 70's & 80's

 

[thetiger2015]

Well the press would do some checking to see if it was true, and I'd sue you for defamation. If you could find three other people to come up with a story about me, and find medical records to back up your claim, then I'd be worried.

Has Brand sued Channel 4 for defamation?

I don't think he can yet, while another investigation is under way? That has to conclude before you can sue for damages that are yet to materialise I believe?

It's for the authorities to investigate the claims, not the media though?

 

[MikeJ]

I don't think he can yet, while another investigation is under way? That has to conclude before you can sue for damages that are yet to materialise I believe?

It's for the authorities to investigate the claims, not the media though?

No.

and

There's been lots of things uncovered by journalism that have lead to police action. Watergate for instance. Thalidomide for another.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

No.

and

There's been lots of things uncovered by journalism that have lead to police action. Watergate for instance. Thalidomide for another.

Whilst that is true and long may it continue, it is a different case, they were organisations and not directed at a person with only hearsay.

 

[IanSuth]

BoJo partygate started as leaked stories in press and took a lot to get Plod to investigate but ended up leading to legal action

 

[Paulzx]

Four different women have accused him of sexual assault and rape, over a period of seven years.

Yeah, let's just let him carry on working and not mention it, in case it brings out anyone else that may have suffered

Four different women have accused him of sexual assault and rape, over a period of seven years.

Yeah, let's just let him carry on working and not mention it, in case it brings out anyone else that may have suffered.

Many people have made accusations of this sort and turned out to be untrue. Some people do it for the money. Knowing the way some of these hit pieces are done, I wouldn't trust any of the media.

What is truly appalling is the pressure to de-platform him just based on accusations and that's all they are at the moment. Disliking Russell Brand is not an excuse to treat him as guilty. If there is a case, let the courts deal with it and then make judgement. I suspect though, there will never be a court case because it probably wasn't the motive to go public with this