Cliff Richards to sue BBC

[chrisd]

I really hate the "no smoke without fire" in this case. That suggests that he's guilty but it can't be proven, how about that he may have been totally wrongly accused ?

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Wow, still got his posters on your bedroom wall have you Phil, #FanBoy 😜

Not my cup of tea , just think he has been treated very badly

 

[williamalex1]

If he wins, will they play him on Radio one

 

[bigslice]

seems KITTY didnt like his fur ruffled.

Ha ha, come folk google it n c the rumours. Anyone seen the new Krays film

 

[freddielong]

Not a big fan of innocent until proven guilty Fish? How about the landlord arrested for the bristol woman who was murdered, was castigated by all, but found to be completely unconnected?

I can see why you brought it up but it was a completely different kind of case and he was connected by being the landlord of the murdered women and was a suspect, this is a totally different type of case were the crime is an accusation made against him, it's not a who done it more of a did he do it.

 

[williamalex1]

Why doesn't he sue his accuser too

 

[Imurg]

Why doesn't he sue his accuser too

Because he probably doesn't know who it is as they keep their anonymity..

 

[williamalex1]

Because he probably doesn't know who it is as they keep their anonymity..

If that's the case , it seems very unjust.

 

[Imurg]

If that's the case , it seems very unjust.

It is. The Accused is named, the Accuser often not.....

 

[williamalex1]

It is. The Accused is named, the Accuser often not.....

Cliff must know who accused him .How can the police possibly question anyone about an alleged assault , without telling them the time, date, place , of the alleged assault. Also if the alleged victim was male or female.

 

[FairwayDodger]

How can the police possibly question anyone about an alleged assault , without telling them the time, date, place , of the alleged assault. Also if the alleged victim was male or female.

Clearly they can't. The accuser is not named publicly but the accused will obviously know who it is.

 

[williamalex1]

Clearly they can't. The accuser is not named publicly but the accused will obviously know who it is.

Sorry Karen , i edited my post as you were posting :cheers:

 

[FairwayDodger]

Sorry Karen , i edited my post as you were posting :cheers:

Great minds and all that.... :cheers:

 

[williamalex1]

Great minds and all that.... :cheers:

One thing i've never been accused of :rofl:

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I think Cliff Richard is perfectly justified in his actions, irrespective of the parliamentary inquiry having said the BBC did nothing wrong. Surely the police were accountable for leaking news of the raid, and the invasion of privacy and subsequent effect on reputation and health mean there's a case to answer as he's been exonerated on all counts