Bill Roach charged

chameleon · 2 May 2013 at 07:10

Is it just me or does it seem strange/harsh/downright dodgy that Bill Roach gets charged with rape of a 15 year old 45 years after the event?
I am not condoning any sort of bad behaviour, now, then or ever but what are the chances of even getti g a conviction? Surely it'll boil down to his word against hers. Evidence will be pretty much non existent. Why wait this long before finally speaking up?
It seems like a lot of these other cases, Max Clifford, Rolf bleeding Harris for gawds sake! Could they not be a case of star struck groupies pretty much throwing themselves at these big names (hard to believe in some cases, I admit) and the star not saying no when it is handed to them on a plate? Is bill Roach only charged with rape because she was 15 year old and underage? Is he just guilty of being careless or naíve? Did he even know how old she was?

It seems all to easy to make claims for something that happened so many years ago. It'll be interesting to see how many, if any convictions the police get from any of these cases. If guilty, they should throw the book at them but to have waited so long will surely make it near impossible to get a conviction. There will be no forensic evedence and will boil down to he said/she said.

Danthus · 2 May 2013 at 07:17

Didn't he say something really dodgy recently about sexual offences and was forced to apologise?

Twirlywoos · 2 May 2013 at 07:19

I think people (chavs) are using this as an opportunity to make false allegations, these are occurring far too much to be true. Depends what evidence was shown, but 40 plus years after the alleged offence - the mind boggles. I'm sure almost 50 years ago people were getting married at 15 so what was the age of consent then?

atpbx · 2 May 2013 at 07:22

chameleon said:
Is it just me or does it seem strange/harsh/downright dodgy that Bill Roach gets charged with rape of a 15 year old 45 years after the event?
I am not condoning any sort of bad behaviour, now, then or ever but what are the chances of even getti g a conviction? Surely it'll boil down to his word against hers. Evidence will be pretty much non existent. Why wait this long before finally speaking up?
It seems like a lot of these other cases, Max Clifford, Rolf bleeding Harris for gawds sake! Could they not be a case of star struck groupies pretty much throwing themselves at these big names (hard to believe in some cases, I admit) and the star not saying no when it is handed to them on a plate? Is bill Roach only charged with rape because she was 15 year old and underage? Is he just guilty of being careless or naíve? Did he even know how old she was?

It seems all to easy to make claims for something that happened so many years ago. It'll be interesting to see how many, if any convictions the police get from any of these cases. If guilty, they should throw the book at them but to have waited so long will surely make it near impossible to get a conviction. There will be no forensic evedence and will boil down to he said/she said.

See the good thing about a court is, all the questions you have posed here will be answered in due course.

Freakbro · 2 May 2013 at 07:25

majnu said:
I'm sure almost 50 years ago people were getting married at 15 so what was the age of consent then?

The age of consent in the UK rose from 12 to 16 in 1885

Though there has been discussions recently about lowering it to 14 - this would only apply to consensual sex between individuals of approx the same age. As it stands at the moment, a 15 y/o boy can be criminalized and put on the sex offenders register for having sex with his 15 yo girlfriend, which is ridiculous.

Pawnless Endgame · 2 May 2013 at 07:54

I stopped believing these dead/old paedo stories a while back. It seems to be the culture since the Savile claims.

ToxicTBag · 2 May 2013 at 07:55

This will get Deidre's glasses all steamed up

MikeB · 2 May 2013 at 07:57

How can you possibly convict if on the jury, you are saying that beyond all reasonable doubt he could be guilty, based purely on one persons word against another's you cannot possibly do that.

Are we in a world where when we are 70 we can be convicted for a cheeky grope we may or may not have done in the disco when we were 18

Cosimo · 2 May 2013 at 08:10

OldCoals said:
Didn't he say something really dodgy recently about sexual offences and was forced to apologise?

He did:

http://news.sky.com/story/1066749/bill-roache-soap-star-sorry-over-remarks

and:

During his interview with TVNZ, Roache said: "Everyone's innocent until they're proven guilty."

The trouble is that once these allegations appear in the press the guilty verdict is in.

PermaChanged · 2 May 2013 at 08:13

It's quite clear the girl is falsifying the story, how are you all so stupid!? A 15 year old girl is claiming she was raped 46 years ago, do the math!

harshuk · 2 May 2013 at 08:23

Everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

The saville saga has just made making allegations far too easy.

antijoke · 2 May 2013 at 08:26

It's the new whiplash don't you know.

chameleon · 2 May 2013 at 08:35

Bear in mind the woman making the allegation must be 60 now so I don't think you can really call her a chav. Money grabbing opportunist maybe but not a chav.

The Geezer · 2 May 2013 at 08:37

His reputation is ruined whether he did it or not.

Some of you won't remember but back in the 80's the guy who played Len Fairclough was found guilty of inappropriate behaviour with young girls at a swimming pool.

chameleon · 2 May 2013 at 08:42

Ah but getting charged and being found guilty are totally different.

sandy10 · 2 May 2013 at 08:44

It's Deirdre I feel sorry for.

Twirlywoos · 2 May 2013 at 08:46

Freakbro said:
The age of consent in the UK rose from 12 to 16 in 1885

Though there has been discussions recently about lowering it to 14 - this would only apply to consensual sex between individuals of approx the same age. As it stands at the moment, a 15 y/o boy can be criminalized and put on the sex offenders register for having sex with his 15 yo girlfriend, which is ridiculous.

Didn't know it was as early as 1885. The consensual age between couples should be lowered to at least 16. There are many teenage mothers, but then the problem arises when you have a 16 year old female and an elderly male having sex, then it will always look like the female was "groomed". You cannot put a minimum age on mental maturity imo.

Orionaut · 2 May 2013 at 09:25

I wonder how much more attrition Corrie can take before it goes off air??

WillyNelson · 2 May 2013 at 09:28

OldCoals said:
Didn't he say something really dodgy recently about sexual offences and was forced to apologise?

Yup. He said that victims of sexual assaults bring it upon themselves through their actions in this life or a previous one. He also said that those accused of abuses should have anonymity and those convicted should be forgiven.

It would seem that he knew he'd poked the odd groupie back in the 60's and that some of them would be below the age of consent. I guess he suspected that the Yewtree witchunt might look in his direction before long.

Wasn't it Max Clifford who warned of the investigation turning into a witchunt and that it should stop... right before the local constabulary came knocking on his door?

ExRayTed · 2 May 2013 at 09:34

The Geezer said:
His reputation is ruined whether he did it or not.

Some of you won't remember but back in the 80's the guy who played Len Fairclough was found guilty of inappropriate behaviour with young girls at a swimming pool.

No, he was cleared. His life was still utterly ruined by it though. Parasitic newspapers desperate to sell copies didn't help.