Noel Clarke

Exactly what? Because Jimmy Saville never faced trial it means that you are ok to label others as sexual predators without trial too?

 

Thing is, in order to get people to come forward they need to feel they are believed. False allegations are rare compared to people just not reporting or the CPS not prosecuting.

 

Have a look at sexual assault stats and prosecutions. Makes very sombre reading imo.

 

Correct they do. There's a difference between that and a media witch hunt though isn't there?

False allegations are not that rare though. That's just not true. Around one in twenty allegations officially lodged with police are found to be or suspected of being a false allegation and around one in twelve of those where the supposed victim chose not to make an official allegation but still publicly named their alleged attacker to either friends or on social media. That's a lot of people falsely accused and named as sexual predators and having their lives ruined.

I'm all for life sentences for predators but a trial has to be done. The guardian isn't judge jury and executioner

 

I have. That doesn't excuse saying that because Saville was a nonce everyone else accused is

 

Those false allegation stats seem to be a lot higher than I've read.

 

Good show is Viewpoint well worth a watch. Bit tougher watching it last night with the allegations especially with him being in a sex scene. I will watch the finale on ITV Hub.

 

I'm more bothered about pedophiles and rapists getting away with it than false allegations.

 

The official figure for reported sexual assaulted believed to be or proven to be false is 4% which is just shy of one in 20. The figure for unofficial accusations is much higher which makes sense logically

 

The media dont seem to think so!!!

 

Oh well let's just lock up anyone accused then. No need for a trial because it doesn't matter how many lives you ruin as long as nobody else gets away with it.

I'm bothered by both, I'm weird like that

 

Because of the allegations made against Ryan Giggs he has been snubbed regarding being included in the Premier League Hall of Fame. To my mind that is wrong as is the treatment of Noel Clarke.
Allegations are just that and shouldn't be acted on until someone is found guilty.

The question for those whom support the 'banning' of Noel Clarke and the snubbing of Giggs is what should happens if those allegations are not proved or found to be malicious.

 

I'm.not saying they shouldn't have a fair trial. My issue is not enough go to trial. Rape isn't seen as the heinous crime it should be, too many get away with it. There needs to be a huge shift and some men will unfairly get caught up in it but for me that's a price that may have to be paid to redress the balance.

 

The actual apartment building he’s spying on in Viewpoint is our head office in Manchester, on St. John Street.

 

Wow

 

a complex issue but you will not 'redress the balance' by treating anyone unfairly - treating someone unfairly is certainly not a price that anyone should pay.

 

Im not sure where I stand with it to be honest, but false allegations wreck lives- I've seen the impact of this on people I've treated in the past.

When you're getting 20 allegations from various sources though, it doesn't look too good does it? Do you stop them going public about it? Should potential rapists and paedophiles for instance be granted anonymity until found guilty?

Anyone that is proven to have made a false allegation out of malice though should face a lengthy stint in prison.

 

Remember when Ched Evans' allegations came to light? Many people(including many on here) stated that even if he was cleared of rape, his conduct that night was disgraceful and believed he should be kicked out of football as someone with morals like that should not be held up as a role model.

Same thing here, He has apologised for any conduct that may have made his colleagues uncomfortable and denial all off the allegations except one whee he made inappropriate comments to a colleague. So at "best", he has made inappropriate comments. Do we want someone with those morals on TV, especially if it come out he's done more?

Also, think about the alleged victims, and the harm it may be doing them to see him in a prime time TV show. If it is proven that he did not do these things, then it's fairly easy for someone of his profile to get retractions and apologies out there to repair his reputation. Sometime, I think it's better safe than sorry.

 

Being raoed wreaks lives. Not being believed wrecks lives. Having your sexual history as a victim being dragged through the courts wrecks lives. The fact remains it is very difficult to get a conviction of rape. Sonething has to shift.

 

I agree with you apart from the last bit. Once someone has had their name tarnished with sex offences it is incredibly hard for that to be forgotten.