jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (9 posts)

Cornation Street Star Cleared of false Sex Allegations, Life for Liars

  1. theirishobserver. profile image59
    theirishobserver.posted 6 years ago

    More and more innocent people are being falsely accused of sexual crimes; people who make such false accusations should face life in jail as they destroy people’s lives and careers. X-Factor judge, Louis Walsh, was recently falsely accused of sexual assault, the list is endless, yet these Liars and groups that encourage such lies are rarely prosecuted, Life for Liars, should be the message for those who invent such evil lies.
    Coronation Street actor Michael Le Vell has been cleared of child sex allegations.

    The actor, who has played mechanic Kevin Webster in the soap for 28 years, was arrested and interviewed after allegations of a sexual assault were made against him, allegedly having taken place a number of years ago.

    But today police confirmed that after their investigation lawyers decided there was not enough evidence to charge him.

    A spokesman for Greater Manchester Police said: “No further action will be taken against a 46-year-old male from Hale, arrested on suspicion of an historic sexual assault.

    “A file of evidence was prepared for the Crown Prosecution Service, who decided there was insufficient evidence to charge.”

    1. Quilligrapher profile image86
      Quilligrapherposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      “Insufficient evidence” is certainly not grounds to label an accuser a liar. Is there evidence to suggest intent to libel or slander? If not, the accusation of “liar” could also destroy people’s lives or careers and it too suffers from insufficient evidence.

  2. theirishobserver. profile image59
    theirishobserver.posted 6 years ago

    Quilligrapher, thanks for your comment, we can be certain that if there was any evidence in this case, there would have been a prosecution, why should liars get away with such false allegations? They should face the same punishment that is avaialble to those who are convicted of such evil crimes. An eye for and eye smile

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      No, lack of evidence is no more than lack of evidence, not proof  that somebody lied.

    2. Quilligrapher profile image86
      Quilligrapherposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Your position fails to allow for the possibility that an accusation, while valid and true, may lack sufficient supporting evidence to satisfy the legally required burden of proof.
      Failure to prosecute in never a reliable indication that the accuser is a liar!

  3. theirishobserver. profile image59
    theirishobserver.posted 6 years ago

    I undersatnd your point, but surely such accusations leave a man/woman condemned for life, either there is evidence to convict or there is not,the media are consistently naming people as being arrested for sexual crime, yet when those crimes alleged or real are not pursued they remain with the accused for eternity. In Ireland we have people who were arrested and then exonorated, yet every time they appear in the paper the headlines read, "Who was arrested and questioned......", we much have a disincentive to stop people making false allegations smile

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      We already have a disincentive, only recently a woman received a prison sentence for falsely claiming that she had been raped.
      However, there is a world of difference between a false claim and lack of evidence.

  4. LeanMan profile image87
    LeanManposted 6 years ago

    When it comes down to sex crimes more often than not it is one persons word against another and there is no "evidence" so to speak. My daughter was abused by someone we trusted and I confronted them peacefully and they admitted it (just before I beat them unconscious - an act that I don't care if anyone knows or condemns, he pressed no charges as he knows he deserved what he got!) He did it 100%, but the courts could not prosecute because there was no evidence and he would not publicly admit his guilt!

    The problem more than anything in my mind is that the person is identified when the allegation is made and it is publicized - whether it is true or not everyone knows due to the police, the press etc.. If things were kept confidential until a decision was made to go to trial then no one would ever be "hurt".

    Some victims may be disappointed by this but better that than innocent people suffering, the guilty will be caught up with at some point!

  5. zoey24 profile image75
    zoey24posted 6 years ago

    Lack of evidence does not make the accuser a liar, it just means the police did not have sufficiant evidence for it to stand up in court.