Ex Tory Minister

[Hillman avenger]

Interesting the people here who are keen to protect his identity, which I don't disagree with.
Yet when the BBC joined in the police swoop on Cliff Richard, which led to nothing, there were a lot who saw it as confirmation that he was a paedophile.

[Jon Gout]

People had suspected Cliff was a wrongun for decades.

I wouldn't name names for legal reasons, and if Cliff had been referred to in the press as a "knighted elderly Wimbledon crooner" then I suspect people wouldn't name him anyway even if it was obvious who they were talking about.

[birdie]

People had suspected Cliff was a wrongun for decades.

I wouldn't name names for legal reasons, and if Cliff had been referred to in the press as a "knighted elderly Wimbledon crooner" then I suspect people wouldn't name him anyway even if it was obvious who they were talking about.

I'm not sure people thought he was a wrongun but I think it has been known that he prefers men to women, he denies he's gay, but he says that his boyfriend is.
I think that the way the police allowed the BBC to film their search of his flat was out of order, and he didn't know anything about it until he saw it being played out live on the news, Surely, if they thought that the evidence they were looking for might have been destroyed had Richards been told about the warrant they could have sealed off the apartment and made sure no on entered,

[Vespa]

I'm not sure people thought he was a wrongun [..]

Given he's never been charged with any crime why would anyone think he was up to no good?

[Vespa]

Yes it does matter, if an assault has taken place, and don't forget the allegation isn't just a hand up 'er jumper, it's full on rape, the physical evidence would be there in some form or other, after 4 months it's just her word against his.

This is a common pattern we've seen before in church, schools, sports teams, etc. A vulnerable person inside the organisation makes a claim a crime has happened. Because they are inside the organisation they agree it should be dealt with as an internal matter. It's then covered up.

My issue here isn't the name of this person or if they committed the crime (the courts will sort that) it is that the party of government knew there was the claim of sexual assault and didn't immediately tell the accuser the correct course of action was to contact the police.

Reporting sexual offences to the police as soon as they happen is government policy and they spend millions in schemes to promote that behaviour because the government knows that delayed reporting means a delayed investigation and justice is hindered.

They didn't do this, they sat on it for four months until the accuser realised they were more interested in protecting the Tory Party than they were in the truth.

Shameful.

[Jon Gout]

I remember even in the 90s there was talk, not just of him being gay, but being interested in the younger chap. Probably just his general vibe.

The "Bachelor Boy" routine might be cute when you're 21-22, but not when you're 50+. It makes people suspicious.

[birdie]

Yes it does matter, if an assault has taken place, and don't forget the allegation isn't just a hand up 'er jumper, it's full on rape, the physical evidence would be there in some form or other, after 4 months it's just her word against his.

This is a common pattern we've seen before in church, schools, sports teams, etc. A vulnerable person inside the organisation makes a claim a crime has happened. Because they are inside the organisation they agree it should be dealt with as an internal matter. It's then covered up.

My issue here isn't the name of this person or if they committed the crime (the courts will sort that) it is that the party of government knew there was the claim of sexual assault and didn't immediately tell the accuser the correct course of action was to contact the police.

Reporting sexual offences to the police as soon as they happen is government policy and they spend millions in schemes to promote that behaviour because the government knows that delayed reporting means a delayed investigation and justice is hindered.

They didn't do this, they sat on it for four months until the accuser realised they were more interested in protecting the Tory Party than they were in the truth.

Shameful.

It isn't as if the accuser was a 10 year old assaulted by a much older person in authority, she's a flipping grown woman in a responsible position, flipping 'eck, she knows how the system works, or doesn't, and she must have known, given the numerous similar incidents in Westminster, by all Parties I shouldn't wonder, one has to question why she chose to let 'in house' deal with it instead of reporting it to the police the first time, let alone let it carry on for over a year.

[birdie]

I'm not sure people thought he was a wrongun [..]

Given he's never been charged with any crime why would anyone think he was up to no good?

I didn't say he was, I was quoting another poster.

[Vespa]

I'm not sure people thought he was a wrongun [..]

Given he's never been charged with any crime why would anyone think he was up to no good?

I didn't say he was, I was quoting another poster.

I know, I was agreeing with you - badly it seems.

[Vespa]

Yes it does matter, if an assault has taken place, and don't forget the allegation isn't just a hand up 'er jumper, it's full on rape, the physical evidence would be there in some form or other, after 4 months it's just her word against his.

This is a common pattern we've seen before in church, schools, sports teams, etc. A vulnerable person inside the organisation makes a claim a crime has happened. Because they are inside the organisation they agree it should be dealt with as an internal matter. It's then covered up.

My issue here isn't the name of this person or if they committed the crime (the courts will sort that) it is that the party of government knew there was the claim of sexual assault and didn't immediately tell the accuser the correct course of action was to contact the police.

Reporting sexual offences to the police as soon as they happen is government policy and they spend millions in schemes to promote that behaviour because the government knows that delayed reporting means a delayed investigation and justice is hindered.

They didn't do this, they sat on it for four months until the accuser realised they were more interested in protecting the Tory Party than they were in the truth.

Shameful.

It isn't as if the accuser was a 10 year old assaulted by a much older person in authority, she's a flipping grown woman in a responsible position, flipping 'eck, she knows how the system works, or doesn't, and she must have known, given the numerous similar incidents in Westminster, by all Parties I shouldn't wonder, one has to question why she chose to let 'in house' deal with it instead of reporting it to the police the first time, let alone let it carry on for over a year.

Isn't that the same logic as those who blame Harvey Weinstein's victims for not speaking out earlier? There is a degree of manipulation that happens inside these organisations, often centered around not harming it or your career.

[Jon Gout]

Isn't that the same logic as those who blame Harvey Weinstein's victims for not speaking out earlier? There is a degree of manipulation that happens inside these organisations, often centered around not harming it or your career.

Yes. It's odd how often you see women questioning other women in this manner. There are all sorts of reasons to explain what went on.

[kancutlawns]

Yes it does matter, if an assault has taken place, and don't forget the allegation isn't just a hand up 'er jumper, it's full on rape, the physical evidence would be there in some form or other, after 4 months it's just her word against his.

This is a common pattern we've seen before in church, schools, sports teams, etc. A vulnerable person inside the organisation makes a claim a crime has happened. Because they are inside the organisation they agree it should be dealt with as an internal matter. It's then covered up.

My issue here isn't the name of this person or if they committed the crime (the courts will sort that) it is that the party of government knew there was the claim of sexual assault and didn't immediately tell the accuser the correct course of action was to contact the police.

Reporting sexual offences to the police as soon as they happen is government policy and they spend millions in schemes to promote that behaviour because the government knows that delayed reporting means a delayed investigation and justice is hindered.

They didn't do this, they sat on it for four months until the accuser realised they were more interested in protecting the Tory Party than they were in the truth.

Shameful.

It isn't as if the accuser was a 10 year old assaulted by a much older person in authority, she's a flipping grown woman in a responsible position, flipping 'eck, she knows how the system works, or doesn't, and she must have known, given the numerous similar incidents in Westminster, by all Parties I shouldn't wonder, one has to question why she chose to let 'in house' deal with it instead of reporting it to the police the first time, let alone let it carry on for over a year.

Isn't that the same logic as those who blame Harvey Weinstein's victims for not speaking out earlier? There is a degree of manipulation that happens inside these organisations, often centered around not harming it or your career.

Or personal safety.

[Hillman avenger]

I'm not sure people thought he was a wrongun [..]

Given he's never been charged with any crime why would anyone think he was up to no good?

Is the point.
So why is exposure OK for him but not for this minister?
Could it be as simple as Richard appears to be gay, so it's different rules there.

[Eaststand]

Jimmy Savile was never charged with a crime.

EVERYONE knew he was a wrong un.

[Vespa]

I'm not sure people thought he was a wrongun [..]

Given he's never been charged with any crime why would anyone think he was up to no good?

Is the point.
So why is exposure OK for him but not for this minister?
Could it be as simple as Richard appears to be gay, so it's different rules there.

The government has gotten the media to suppress the name, putting to bed the myth that the media are out to get Johnson.

If Beckham was arrested for rape this morning it would be 24/7 news.