And is it just me who feels that the use of language is being twisted deliberately here..?
Bafta does not dispute it received anonymous emails and reports of allegations via intermediaries, but said it was provided with no evidence that would allow it to investigate.
And when did a film & tv awards committee become a branch of the judiciary? Don't even get me started on the insanity of taking the finale of a drama series he was involved in off simply because he's become an 'unperson'...
The rights to the book will now return to Allen.It'll be interesting to see what happens next. Will he find another publisher? Will he self-publish?
In 2016, retired High Court judge Sir Richard Henriques produced an excoriating report on the failings of the inquiry in general, but vital sections (43 in all), including the shortcomings of individual detectives, were redacted.
Yesterday, the largely uncensored version was published, and it could not have been more critical of former DAC Rodhouse – of his judgment, of his decision-making and of his professionalism, which ultimately resulted in £2.5million of public money – and 16 months – being spent on the say-so of a single ‘source’, the now convicted fantasist Carl Beech, aka Nick.He's the fall guy, and deservedly so, but the rest of his team hardly cover themselves in glory:
One crucial lead was a ‘corroborating’ witness called Fred. ‘The DAC,’ said Sir Richard, ‘reiterated the need to explore all options regarding Fred.’ Yet data that could have established his whereabouts and identity was never examined.
‘This is a classic demonstration,’ said the judge, ‘of the difference between investigating and believing an allegation.’
It turned out after Operation Midland was closed in 2016 without any arrests that Fred was Nick using another email address.Basic investigative policy thrown overboard due to the prevailing climate at the time. So why isn't some criticism falling on those who spread the policy of always believing the victim?
The 78-year-old singer made the controversial remark during an appearance on Loose Women on Tuesday.What on earth is 'controversial' about this?
...while the Loose Women panel, which included Sir Cliff's friend Gloria Hunniford, appeared to agree with his comment, viewers expressed outrage.
'Cliff Richard repeating his line that he'd rather 10 guilty rapists walk the streets than 1 innocent person be investigated on #LooseWomen is gross and abhorrent,' said one person on Twitter.
'Imagine having 10 predators on the streets just because you were mildly inconvenienced by an investigation into you that was proven to be untrue?'
Another said: 'I'm not a fan of Cliff Richard but he's turned my stomach saying that 10 guilty men should go free to save one who's innocent. Absolute disgrace.
'The victims of abuse, assault and rape deserve more.'
Another viewer branded his comment 'insane' and 'offensive.' 'Cliff Richard just said one of the stupidest and most offensive things I've ever heard in television,' the viewer wrote on Twitter.Congratulations, 'Loose Women' viewers! You have all just proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that daytime TV lowers your IQ.
