John Leslie

[Lilly]

John Leslie has been accused again of attacking a woman.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...319952,00.html

The alleged incident is said to have occurred 13 years ago in 1995.

He made a statement today in which he said he does not know who this woman is and he is being asked to recall his actions on a night in November 1995. How can anyone remember what they were doing on a given night 13 years ago?

He says how in 2003 his name was dragged through the mud and his career ruined due to similar allegations. The media vilified him....why did this woman not come forward then? Why wait until now?

Back in 2003 a judge discharged him from court having thrown all allegations out and told him he was free to leave the court without a stain on his character......not so as now it looks like the whole thing has started again.

He said if he sounds bitter it's because he is. His name is yet again being dragged through the mud whilst the woman remains anonymous, as the law allows.

I'm not surprised he's bitter. I don't think that people should be able to make allegations of rape 13 years after the event, do you?

[banjoman]

Its all the media isnt it...guilty in the papers before even interviewed. I dont think papers should be allowed to release any details on questioning unless a suspect is officially charged, whether they are famous or not.

I recall a case years ago. A doctor was accussed by two women of being improper whilst they were sedated. The papers printed everything about him and harassed him at home etc. They only ever referred to the women as Mrs X and Mrs Y. They destroyed the guy, his career, marriage and family. ...And at the end of it all the women admitted making it up to get back at him for something. He had done nothing wrong, yet his life was in tatters and they made money from selling the story!!

[WillowTheWhisp]

I don't understand why she didn't come forward originally. I find it very hard to believe there can be any truth in it.

[Bonnyboy]

I don’t particularly like John Leslie so my opinion of him may well be tainted by that fact.

These allegations keep cropping up. I suspect for good reason. I cant see the coppers arresting him for no good reason. Just my opinion.

I think the allegation of rape should be able to be made irrespective of the time lapse between offence and reporting.

[Lilly]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I don't understand why she didn't come forward originally. I find it very hard to believe there can be any truth in it.

That's what I think.

Even if she didn't report it as soon as it happened, why didn't she speak up in 2003 when all the other allegations were being investigated?

[cashman]

can't stand the man, think summat smells with this allegation though.

[Mancie]

I don't think it matters how long ago a serious crime was commited..the thing that bothers me is that in cases of rape, the accused is named even before he/she has been charged of an offence.. that is wrong.
Even people accused of terrorist crimes are not named unless they are avoiding arrest

[BERNADETTE]

In a lot of cases where rape is reported many years after it is by person who was threatened as a child of the consequences if the rape was reported. This is the case in both male and female rape/abuse so no I don't think you can put a time limit on when offences can be reported. As for this case I can't decide but it does seem a bit suspicious leaving it so long to report it but who knows???

[Lilly]

Originally Posted by cashman

think summat smells

Yes, I agree. I think it's this woman.

[Bonnyboy]

Originally Posted by Lilly

I don't think that people should be able to make allegations of rape 13 years after the event

Lilly can I ask why you think that should be the case

[Lilly]

Originally Posted by Bonnyboy;597804[SIZE=2

I think the allegation of rape should be able to be made irrespective of the time lapse between offence and reporting.
[/SIZE]

How can the accused be expected to recall their actions on a random night 13 years ago though?

John Leslie says he doesn't know who this woman is.

Put yourself in his situation.

Imagine the police came to your house tomorrow and said that you had been accused of raping me 13 years ago. They would tell you my name which would mean nothing to you and ask what you were doing on, for example, 24th June 1995.

Obviously you will struggle to recall and then they will probably accuse you of being unsure of your facts.....well you would be unsure of your facts wouldn't you? Apart from one fact, that you hadn't raped me because you've never met me.

We are on the front page of the Observer. Well, I'm not because I'm anonymous but your photograph and name are there for all your friends, family and colleagues to see. We'll probably be discussed on here too.

People are talking about you all over, a lot of people won't speak to you again except to hiss insults at you as you pass them. Your friends and family will be very upset, as will your children.

All this and no wrong doing has been proved.

Wouldn't you be very angry with me?

[WillowTheWhisp]

I do understand that people do not report rape until sometime later dues to many reasons, fear of being disbelieved for one - but this is the John Leslie case we are talking about. Already a big profile case. Now why the heck didn't she come forward then?

[Bonnyboy]

Originally Posted by Lilly

How can the accused be expected to recall their actions on a random night 13 years ago though?

John Leslie says he doesn't know who this woman is.

Put yourself in his situation.

Imagine the police came to your house tomorrow and said that you had been accused of raping me 13 years ago. They would tell you my name which would mean nothing to you and ask what you were doing on, for example, 24th June 1995.

Obviously you will struggle to recall and then they will probably accuse you of being unsure of your facts.....well you would be unsure of your facts wouldn't you? Apart from one fact, that you hadn't raped me because you've never met me.

We are on the front page of the Observer. Well, I'm not because I'm anonymous but your photograph and name are there for all your friends, family and colleagues to see. We'll probably be discussed on here too.

People are talking about you all over, a lot of people won't speak to you again except to hiss insults at you as you pass them. Your friends and family will be very upset, as will your children.

All this and no wrong doing has been proved.

Wouldn't you be very angry with me?

You based all that on the assumption that the man is innocent. In the circumstances you paint , I would be very angry with you.

Maybe the man cannot recall specific dates, but I’m fairly sure he would be able to recall the event should it have happened.

Let me suggest that he is found guilty in this particular instance. Surely his condemnation would be warranted.

If he is found to be guilty would that alter your view ?

[Bonnyboy]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I do understand that people do not report rape until sometime later dues to many reasons, fear of being disbelieved for one - but this is the John Leslie case we are talking about. Already a big profile case. Now why the heck didn't she come forward then?

Who can say, I assume the authorities took her reasoning into account before they arrested Mr Leslie

[cashman]

funnily enough one of me best mates was pulled fer a poor old woman shopkeeper from Gt Harwood, that was murdered back in 60s, he was a teenager at the time, n they said where were you on sat blah blah, one month ago? he was clueless as i would have been meself, apparently some bright spark had rung the police n dropped his name fer it. he was in custody all sat n released sun afternoon, when they came to the conclusion it wasn't him, so how the hell anyone can remember 13 yrs ago is bloody nonsense. me mate sh1t blue lights at the time, think as others have said, this should have been investigated throughly firsthand n if evidence is there, charge him, then its right to name. imho.