Cliff Richard is wrong to want anonymity for sex offence suspects… Jimmy Savile case proved it
Britain's open justice system should mean suspects are named - it's no different to naming accused murderers
WE live in a society which abides by the “innocent until proven guilty” rule.
I fully understand the argument by Sir Cliff Richard and my friend Paul Gambaccini that those accused of sexual offences should remain unnamed.
And I can well see why Sir Cliff says he feels “forever tainted” by the false sex abuse claims against him.
What they have had to endure is something the rest of us would only experience in our worst nightmare.
The strain on those accused and their families is irrevocable, as is the effect on their careers. The anguish and the fear must be unbearable. These situations are life-changing.
But while I understand Cliff and Paul’s argument, I don’t agree with it.
For every innocent man who has to endure what they went through, there are considerably more cases where the accused are guilty.
The point of naming them is to help other victims come forward, and that is something so valuable to Britain’s system of open justice.
It seems obvious to mention it, but the shocking case of Jimmy Savile showed us how important it was for victims to come forward.
If they had not finally had the confidence to speak out, he would still be considered a hero while his victims would walk around damaged for life, incapable of leading normal lives.
And if we don’t name those accused of sex abuse and rape, what are we saying? That we doubt the victims of sex crimes, but no other crimes.
If someone is accused of murder, we name them. Not naming the accused would ring alarm bells for the victim of a sex attack or sexual abuse, giving the impression it is already assumed they are lying and trying to start a smear campaign against an innocent person.
This would then make fewer people come forward.
It is already incredibly difficult to get a conviction for rape in the UK.
According to the charity Rape Crisis, rape has a far lower conviction rate than any other crime, with only 5.7 per cent of reported cases ending in a guilty verdict for the perpetrator.
Meanwhile, roughly 11 adults are raped every HOUR in England and Wales and 31 per cent of young women aged 18 to 24 have reported experiencing sexual abuse in childhood.
Giving the accused anonymity will push these pathetic conviction rates down even more.
As many of you may know, I have been the victim of rape. It was what you would call date rape now — a term that did not exist at the time.
I never named the person but the media chose to name someone.
The lines of rape have often been smudged — let’s not forget there was a time when a husband “couldn’t rape” his wife. Thankfully things are progressing — slowly — but it’s worth remembering the state of affairs when something has happened.
I came under a lot of flak when I wrote about my experience in my book, and I am grateful to the women’s charities and rape charities who contacted me to say it was a positive thing. I was also contacted by people who’d had the same experience as me.
Despite this, I felt very strongly that if I should have named someone, it should have been done at the time. But like many victims of all sorts of crimes, especially sexual, I blamed myself.
related stories
The words of Sarah Green, who is the co-director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, rang very true to me.
She said: “Our legal system is an open justice system. It’s very important that the whole community knows who is accused of a crime, what they may be charged with and the evidence.”
Both Rolf Harris and Max Clifford were convicted of historic sex crimes after more victims came forward following publicity around their arrests.
And more recently the case of footballer Ched Evans, although eventually found not guilty, revealed the behaviour that is sadly so typical of many irresponsible footballers.
It was right he was named.
But what was so shocking about his conviction being quashed was the treatment of his victim — who was not only hauled over the coals on social media but, more terrifyingly, treated as if she was the guilty party.
Delving into her sexual past was reminiscent of something from 20 years ago.
Our justice system still does not have it anywhere near right when it comes to prosecuting sex offenders — and giving the accused anonymity is a giant step in the wrong direction.
This country is at risk of going even more backwards in dealing with victims of sex abuse.
When names were vital
VICTIMS of sexual abuse often only come forward following reports that their attacker has been arrested. Here are some famous examples:
STUART HALL
The It’s A Knockout presenter, now 86, was arrested for indecent assault in December 2012 and was eventually jailed for 30 months for crimes against girls as young as nine. A second trial followed. While cops were initially aware of three victims, more came forward following the publicity surrounding the arrest.
ROLF HARRIS
The kids’ TV host was not named when arrested for sex offences in March 2013. It was only after Harris was named in the media later in the year that further women contacted police. Several went on to give evidence in court. Harris, now 86, was jailed for five years and nine months for 12 indecent assaults.
MAX CLIFFORD
The publicist was jailed for eight years in 2014 for indecently assaulting four young women. Some victims only came forward after hearing Clifford, now 73, had been arrested.