RE: MP wants answers to Cliff Richard search - 2

Quote: astwood wrote in post #5

---

Quote: Sheldonboy wrote in post #4

---

Quote: astwood wrote in post #3

---

Cliff needs A SUMMER HOLIDAY

---

as long as he doesn't go off with the Young ones.

---

CONGRATULATIONS SB

---

Quote: mikejee wrote in post #15

---

One bunch of clowns describes treatment of an aged pain as inept

---

It's time all this was sorted out ,and those who done it was made to explain .

I think they set out to make an example of Cliff but it backfired.

Allegations of abuse rear their ugly heads again.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31630793

Rolf harris was a big suprise,but if he's convicted be even more of a shock,he's into god if I remember right.

How all this stuff has been kept secret for years baffles me

People thought they wouldnt be believed,then the jimmy savile scandel brought it all out in the open.

I reckon there must be loads of people just waiting for the doorbell to ring.

More likely dreading that call.

I cannot claim to be Cliffs greatest fan, although I have seen him perform twice and I must say both shows were excellent. But this attack on his privacy I must say was well out of order. I agree the Police must check out allegations against anyone if they are serious enough But to take the BBC in with them was totally out of order. Especially as it turned out there was no proof to charge him. This business of being able to give an accused persons name to the world before anything is proven in my opinion is totally wrong. Mr Richard has already had damages from the Police and now I hope he takes The BBC to the cleaners.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43731668

You are probably right SB, though he is such a slimy creature that I find it difficult to say so, especially as other even more slimy ones, who have done far more harm, such as Farage and Boris, have not been put away

I don't understand why the police raided his home anyway.
He has at least three proper homes to my certain knowledge, if he was saving evidence against himself for some mythical historical misdeed it could be in any one of them.
What did they expect to find?

Despite the BBCs desperate denials of everything, it is quite clear to me that they had no right to be there or to broadcast anything before the police have found evidence and made it public.
There was no overriding public interest. Cliff isn't royalty, he earns and spends his own money legitimately and most of the public couldn't care less. The BBC was too keen to be first to report what they hoped was his downfall.

The police would probably have lost any case they might have had because they published the details before they investigated or found evidence, thereby prejudicing their case and a making a fair trial impossible.