Looks like he's been eating too many Hamsters! Poor bloke, was a terrific entertainer in his day. I remember seeing him at the Circus Tavern and his impression of Elvis was the best I've ever seen.
I saw him at Caesars Palace in Luton back in the 80's and he had the whole room in stitches. A very funny man. It's heartbreaking to see what he has become.
Although I agree about accusations sticking, even when found to have no substance, I've gotta admit that until I just opened this thread, I'd completely forgotten he'd even been questioned. This is probably due to the amount of such-like cases that have been and gone...........
Lack of evidence is not the same as no evidence. You need a certain burden of proof to prosecute, it is perfectly possible for there to be enough evidence for anyone who has seen it to be highly suspicious that he has done something but also know that the case is too weak to stand up in court.
For very good reason this info won't be shared with the public, we just have to trust in the CPS to do their job properly and make the right judgement call.
Lack of evidence is not the same as no evidence. You need a certain burden of proof to prosecute, it is perfectly possible for there to be enough evidence for anyone who has seen it to be highly suspicious that he has done something but also know that the case is too weak to stand up in court.
For very good reason this info won't be shared with the public, we just have to trust in the CPS to do their job properly and make the right judgement call.
There it is: "we have to trust in the CPS to do their job properly..."
We also have to trust in politicians to do their job properly. Until the revolution.
Isn't the point that if there isn't enough evidence now, there wasn't enough evidence 18 months ago? Presumably they got his DNA and it didn't match anything on record and nobody else came forward. What makes me uneasy is advertising the accused to the public in the hope of flushing out some evidence.
Getting through the judicial system doesn't mean beyond doubt they are innocent, it just means that a jury cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt they are guilty.
How is a woman supposed to prove, some 30 years later, that the trauma, that is ever present in her life, was real? She can't , and that is the problem for both the accused and the accusers. We thankfully live in different times and men are IMO, way more understanding as to of the limits of their sexual conduct. Freddie Starr was himself very badly abused by his father, and Freddie seemed to possess a self destruct button. We will never know the full stories but I would hope that we may agree that abuse, of any kind, is not permissible in any society that claims to be civilised.
Everyone arrested should be given anonymity until they are found guilty.
The damage to reputation and the way celebrity/accused names are dragged through the dirt before even being found guilty is disgusting. Once they're found innocent or released the media drops the story (or covers the verdict on page 20 in tiny writing) and the damage is already done.
I've read that the CP decided 6 weeks ago that they were not going ahead with this case, but did not tell anboby including FS legel team, because they did not want it to affect the Max Clifford trial. Surely that is wrong.
Who knows what went on? Freddie was abused and a lot of women have been abused. Why is it necessary to take sides There is insufficient evidence on both sides. Just stay true to the ideal that no human being should be abused. Isn't that the issue on which we can all agree?
If this is to remain an RIP thread would admin like to take the previous "arrested" title and content out. Out of respect for the dead man, after all nothing was proven in a court of law.
Comments
It's heartbreaking to see what he has become.
For very good reason this info won't be shared with the public, we just have to trust in the CPS to do their job properly and make the right judgement call.
We also have to trust in politicians to do their job properly. Until the revolution.
Isn't the point that if there isn't enough evidence now, there wasn't enough evidence 18 months ago? Presumably they got his DNA and it didn't match anything on record and nobody else came forward. What makes me uneasy is advertising the accused to the public in the hope of flushing out some evidence.
The line lack of evidence leaves it open like above for people to say just because they couldn't prove it doesn't mean it didn't happen
There's two ways don't publicly announce the person in question and keep them out of the press and let the investigation run under the radar
Which means less people may come forward
Or prosecute those that can not back up their claims with evidence
That man until proven guilty is innocent
What if he was your son how would you feel watching his life end and have no chance of ever dispelling the rumours
What about his kids his family their lives ruined
For what absolutely nothing thus far
If the man or anyone else has done something then get them to court and prove it
And if they get off through the judicial system then it's beyond doubt that they are innocent
Like ken Barlow and the mp and DLT to a degree as he still has to under go further court cases
Who pays for this, do they get money back for the defence and clearing their name
In Freddie stars case it never even got to court so who picks up his bill
It's a disgrace the whole system is flawed
There for the grace of god go I and all other men and your kids
Before anyone says if it gets one peado of the street it's worth it
Yep your right it is but it doesn't mean it's the right way to go about it
Things need to change
The damage to reputation and the way celebrity/accused names are dragged through the dirt before even being found guilty is disgusting. Once they're found innocent or released the media drops the story (or covers the verdict on page 20 in tiny writing) and the damage is already done.
If you proven not guilty in a court of law then that is what you are
If as in this case you don't even get to court people will just say there wasn't enough evidence but he done it regardless of if he did or didn't
It needs to be in secret there can be no leaks
And if more dint come forward because they don't know it's happening then the offender will only face the charge that first comes to court
SA it's a horrid and horrific situation for those to find themself in I can't imagine how they feel
But up until someone is charged and found guilty there is no closure for them either
Now their family and friends will be doubting them as there was insufficient evidence to prosecute
They prosecuted max Clifford and had enough evidence for that
In this situation until such evidence arrives it has to be that it didn't happen
Character of my childhood growing up
If this is to remain an RIP thread would admin like to take the previous "arrested" title and content out. Out of respect for the dead man, after all nothing was proven in a court of law.