Dispatches channel 4 expose **Read Opening Post before posting**

"future victims" is a very interesting choice of words. How can I protect people from becoming your future victims? Minority Report was the name of the film I believe, pre-crime and all that.

So you are saying that you wouldn't threaten legal action if you had the means, in an attempt to stop someone publicly making false allegations about you and ruining your life and career? You would be that brave soldier looking for your day in court to somehow prove your innocence in a "he said - she said" legal battle?

Hows that working out for Kevin Spacey?

Did everyone here believe his six accusers and conclude he was guilty, or give him the benefit of "presumed innocent until found guilty beyond reasonable doubt"?

I believed he was guilty largely based on the sheer number of allegations and having a baseline trust in the Police and the CPS.

It's worth noting it was not just Mendy but also Louis Saha and a third man was charged, the third man was interviewed as a witness and then bizarrely over the course of a number of months arrested 3 times on 3 separate charges, all eventually dropped.

He returned to his home country once allowed and didn't return.

If that isn't witness intimidation I don't know what is.

That’s why I hate these type of documentaries and news reports- I don’t like Brand- I could say other things I feel about him but I’d get banned for doing so - but I don’t believe this is the correct way towards justice- it’s a phishing expedition - hate him and all as I do, he has a legal right to his good name as we all do- if there are victims out there, then the true path to justice for them, however flawed that path might be, is to make a complaint to the police- that’s it, that’s the starting point.

In America they seem to go to the press first when it comes to a famous person- I don’t know why that is- some say it’s to get money -that’s abusing the justice system for monetary means in my view and I don’t hold such accusations with much credibility as a result.

But at least one of the victims here is UK based and the alleged crimes took place in the UK- I don’t understand why that person has chosen this way forward- it’s majorly complicating any legal process that may happen at a later stage and personally I don’t think that person will get any satisfaction from what’s happening right now.

The only minor celeb I can think of is Chris Hardwick in america, he hosts the Nerdist podcast and walking dead aftershow (the talking dead). His ex accused him of abuse and was found to have lied and he has worked since.

I have never read of a conspiracy of women falsely accusing a celeb of sexaul assault so hard to judge if someone can come back from multiple accusations.

Do you not see the danger though? Everyone else is then in position where a he said she said is all they have to go on. A society cannot make fair judgements based on stuff like that regardless of what many on this thread think.

Also important to remember how Harvey Weinstein's downfall came about; a long investigation over several months by experienced journalists who convinced a few women to come forward with their stories about being assaulted by Weinstein but who hadn't gone to the police previously, which then encouraged more women to come forward with their experiences.

It's usually based on two factors; women not knowing if they were the only one it happened to and not wanting to be the only one trying to take on someone with the power and resources of a rich & famous man, and also the threat of legal action as a reprisal if they did come forward but didn't have enough evidence (whereas multiple women coming forward helps demonstrate a pattern of repeat behaviour).

All it took for Weinstein was the first few women willing to stick their heads above the parapet, backed up by the investigation of journalists, and most of Weinstein's crimes became apparant and pretty much undeniable.

I am not comparing Brand to Weinstein (before people start getting their knickers in a twist). Simply pointing out that there are numerous reasons why women might not come forward, or might not go to the police.

And your solution is the media only reports on stories that have come through the court process? The medias job is to report. It always has. This isn't a single girl with shaky evidence and no second source.

Not one person has said or implied anything as such, but I'm sensing that it's very convenient for you to toss this out, as it suits your agenda to think this.

Yes, I see the danger. There is no perfect way to resolve this.

Yeah, she's 30 now, 16 at the time.

What I'm trying to get at, is just because she didn't report it to the police at the time, or even go to them now, does it mean it didn't happen?

I think we can all see how a vulnerable 16 year old mightn't do everything she was supposed to do after being orally raped. So what does she do 14 years later? Especially if this guy is still high profile and could still be at it.

We are post Weinstein though.

In some respects particularly when allegations against celebrities are made public there is immediate reaction and some would say over reaction or unfair reaction.

Just on this case, Brands shows have been cancelled, his charities have dropped him, his agents have dropped him, his back catalogue have been erased and one of the biggest media companies in the world have financially penalised him, add in the fact that the MET have basically taken out an Add on him. That was all in 48 hours, based on serious but anonymous historical allegations.

Just in the past year you had Scofield and Edwards immediately cancelled (no criminality), Mason Greenwood suspended, loaned out and removed from a video game immediately.

Any reasonable observer would have to ask the question what the hell were the CPS thinking when you even have casual look at the case against Mendy / Saha or Spacey.

You can also mention Caroline Flack, where the CPS stated her case should have been dealt with by caution, it was the police that appealed that decision.

So the idea that Celebrity Power particularly in a post Weinstein world affords you immunity from Justice doesn't really pass the smell test when scrutinised.

I get it. But if several other people had similar allegations?

It just isn't black and white. John Gilligan must be innocent of any involvement in Veronica Guerin's murder because he was never convicted of it and those journalists and guards who claim he ordered it, well that's just their claims then.

I’m not an US presidential election denier but I have asked the question “Why haven’t these people gone to the police as opposed to participating in a documentary?”

I think it’s a very valid question to ask. It doesn’t mean I’m placing some value judgement on what they’re saying - not at all - but if a crime is committed, Shirley it’s the law enforcement of that country you go to first, not the papers?

It must also be said though, that under the jurisdiction of the UK, any future potential criminal proceedings could now be in doubt or severely impacted at least given the overwhelming coverage of this story. I don’t know what these alleged victims thought would happen as a result of all this publicity against Brand, but I don’t see it as a good thing if I’m honest- flawed and all the justice system is in the UK, it’s a far better And safer place to be than the front page of the Daily Mail .