More potential Tory sleaze

[Bob McC]

I was not aware that English law had been changed to give anonymity to accused rapists.

 

[Seeker_UK]

I was not aware that English law had been changed to give anonymity to accused rapists.

AIUI anonymity is preserved until charged and no-one has been charged yet.

If the whip was removed, it might make it hard to preserve anonymity; I would think that no action is taken until they are charged.

 

[deanf]

It's unclear why he is not being named and therefore why the whip has not been removed, if or when he is he'll be suspended like a shot. Is it to protect the alledged victim, to allow anonymity until a full investigation has taken place and to see if other alledged victims come forward, safeguarding for him or his family, alledged victim protection, or whether the police and media (starting with the BBC) have learnt their lesson after other false public shamings of famous people?

note. we are safe to say he because the BBC is reporting, "[in a statement] The Metropolitan Police said, "A man in his 50s was arrested on Saturday 1 August on suspicion of rape. He has been released on bail to return on a date in mid-August."" (link)

edit. and the Sunday Times is reporting he is a "former minister " (link)

 

[Joe Hutch]

And remember, on pfm the assumption is guilty unless proven innocent, especially if the accused is a Tory.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I was not aware that English law had been changed to give anonymity to accused rapists.

The law doesn’t need changing. Even leaving aside the legal requirement to keep rape victims’ details anonymous, data protection will expect him not to be named unless and until there is a compelling reason to do so. That would normally be after charging, at the earliest.

 

[paulfromcamden]

And remember, on pfm the assumption is guilty unless proven innocent, especially if the accused is a Tory.

If the accused is a Tory it's probably a reasonable assumption.

 

[blossomchris]

Maybe there is some attraction to a whip?

A good lashing, baby oil applied first, they lurveeeee a bit of slap and tickle, the perverted bullies.

 

[Brian]

And remember, on pfm the assumption is guilty unless proven innocent, especially if the accused is a Tory.

Or is a ‘brexiteer’, or it is believed there is any possibility of such.

 

[Joe Hutch]

Or is a ‘brexiteer’, or it is believed there is any possibility of such.

String 'em up. It's the only language they understand.

 

[Brian]

String 'em up. It's the only language they understand.

Couldn’t agree more.

 

[FireMoon]

The person concerned seems to have pretty much outed himself, either that, or what has happened today is an incredible coincidence

 

[Bob McC]

The law doesn’t need changing. Even leaving aside the legal requirement to keep rape victims’ details anonymous, data protection will expect him not to be named unless and until there is a compelling reason to do so. That would normally be after charging, at the earliest.

Tell Cliff Richard that...

 

[Barrymagrec]

Tell Cliff Richard that...

He deserved a good sorting out - even if he didn`t do it.

 

[kendo]

And remember, on pfm the assumption is guilty unless proven innocent, especially if the accused is a Tory.

Curiously, when I googled "tory rape" there were 76,800,000 results...

 

[deanf]

First Brexit, then The Trump, now “The chairman of the association, who the Daily Mail has chosen not to name..”. (link) The world’s gone crazy I tell you.. crazy !!

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Tell Cliff Richard that...

And both the BBC, and South Yorkshire police faced consequences for that disgraceful event. But actually, it was that case which caused the rethink that led to the decision, by and large, that nobody would be named before charging.

 

[Joe Hutch]

I guess another factor in not naming the suspect might be that naming him would make it possible to identify his accuser.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I guess another factor in not naming the suspect might be that naming him would make it possible to identify his accuser.

Indeed. And also why he has not had the whip withdrawn, I presume, as that would identify him too. The BBC doesn’t seem to have joined the dots on that one and tried to make out not suspending the whip was a disgrace. Not sure if that was stupidity or disingenuousness.

 

[Barrymagrec]

So many people must know his identity, it`s not likely to remain secret very long.

 

[Joe Hutch]

Stupidity would be my guess. They also 'ambushed' the Business Secretary, who had been invited on to the Today programme to discuss an issue related to the government's response to COVID, with a question about the allegations.