Skip to content

Always believe the accuser, right?

Actor did not attend celebrity ball where it was claimed he groped one of his accusers

Oh. Right.

15 thoughts on “Always believe the accuser, right?”

  1. Donald Trump could have done with that sensible jury, but unfortunately (for him) he was tried in New York.

  2. My memory is that Anna Raccoon claimed that Saville couldn’t have done some of the crimes he was charged with: she’d lived in the relevant children’s care home and so knew that the accounts she was reading were wrong.

    In Oz Cardinal Pell was charged, convicted, and jailed for a crime that apparently could not have happened.

    Personally I suspect that Roman Catholic Cardinals should all be locked up but I would prefer that it were for actual crimes, not invented ones pursued by a corrupt State government, police force, bar, and judiciary. The State of Victoria should have left those sorts of antics to their natural home in the Vatican.

  3. Come to think of it, you could look on the Pell case as Victoria practising for its misbehaviour over Covid. Maybe once a system of government has become as undeniably corrupt as Victoria’s the bastards should all be machine-gunned to stop them doing it again.

    Like the Board of NatWest, eh?

  4. Something similar happened with the accusations against William Roach. He didn’t have the car that he was accused of being in when the alleged assault took place.

  5. Spacey should be jailed for Crimes against Acting and for appearing in that Usual Suspects bollox.

  6. Wasn’t at least one of the cases Rolf Harris was convicted of one where he was never in the town in question on the day or even year in question?

  7. @ Jim
    Yes, but because he misremembered (umpteen years later) the actual date of his flight back to the UK, the persecutors claimed that his alibi (being in the USA) was fake and he must be guilty. There was no evidence, apart from the accuser’s, that he was even in the city in question.

  8. Must confess I never pay attention to all the scandalous accusations that arise from time to time. So I really can’t say what’s true and what isn’t.

    But I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if some people made false accusations. This is, after all, why we’re supposed to have the innocent-until-proven-guilty approach.

  9. Like Jim, I remember well the Role Harris case steamrollering along when the defence proved the date of an accusation wrong, as like this case, it was too good to be true.

  10. Rich and famous accused + anonymous accuser + someone else to pay legal fees = a grifter’s charter.

  11. I imagine 12 years as artistic director of the Old Vic would leave him with a long list of spurned thesps eager for revenge.

    I read that he was successfully sued by the producers of House of Cards for huge sums because they were ‘forced’ to sack him over the allegations. Wonder if there is any chance of recouping that? Probably not in the US banana republic legal system.

  12. “Rich and famous accused + anonymous accuser + someone else to pay legal fees + chance for accuser to make some money in compo = a grifter’s charter.”


  13. There was another case a while back about a musician and their defence was the tour schedule showing the alleged dates and location didn’t match up, believe the prosecution responded with it was a long time ago so getting the date wrong didn’t mean anything, thankfully the jury saw otherwise. Pretty sloppy investigation and it does seem the current trend of trying to remove juries from cases is because they keep acting rationally and believe in the beyond reasonable doubt principle which is upsetting for the police and prosecutors

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *