Search results

'Exclusive' in The People, case dropped due lack of evidence, so another good man has had his named dragged through the mud for no reason. And the accuser slips back into the shadows and remains anonymous, seriously flawed process.

I know it was nearly 30 years ago but I'm pretty sure Peter Adamson was named before he went on trial, the thing with Le Vell is now whatever happens he will always be tarnished by the initial allegations, regardless of whether he did or didnt do it. For the record given the information already...

As Michael Le Vell (Corrie's Kevin Webster) is the latest person who has to endure trial by tabloid, surely a person is innnocent until proven guilty? Should the accused not be allowed anonymity (like the alleged victim) until they have been convicted by a court? Didn't this used to be the case?