The grotesque politicised witch-hunt by the CPS, police and Keir Starmer, the complete idiot former Director of Public Prosecutions, is shown to be just that with the verdict today on the non-evidenced accusations against the ex-dj DLT, in the wake of the very similar case and outcome re Bill Roache. The stupid cases against Rolf and Max Clifford will surely go the same way, and hopefully they will all join Jim Davidson in taking legal action against the police and CPS.

In all of these cases there are mere accusations -- most of which anyway are of the mildest misdemeanours which in former times (the times relevant to the case) would have been dismissed for their triviality -- with no evidence of any kind in support. Self-evidently, if the case amounts to no more than some woman's word against that of a man, then the natural prejudice in favour of women and against men should never have blinded the authorities to the fact that there was not even in principle the prospect of achieving a conviction according to the civil let alone the criminal standard of proof, and that therefore there was no basis on which the case should ever have got to court. The CPS, police and Keir Starmer merely relied upon the natural pro-female and anti-male prejudices of jurors to do their dirty ideological cowardly crowd-pleasing work for them.

The non-logical -- indeed, bloody fool -- basis of invoking a 'no smoke without fire' principle is the multiplicity of allegation; yet anyone who knows the first thing about these sort of cases realises that parallel allegations are never cross-corroborating. Police cum media trawls for further putative 'victims' invariably produces bogus or highly exaggerated accusations; when, as is well researched, it is well-known that women and girls commonly fabricate sexual assault scenarios as cover for all kinds of mild embarrassment (let alone sex behind the back of a boyfriend). And then there is the phenomenon of 'recovered memory' invention, which is exacerbated by the enormous elapse of time (several decades).

These considerations lead even leading barristers (see Barbara Hewson, for example) to point out that the same applies to the accusations against Jimmy Saville. They likewise are entirely non-evidenced and multiple through police-media trawling. The point at issue is that anyone, regardless of character, placed in the position as was Jimmy Saville of being employed to be famous and gee up crowds of older girls and younger women, would have been on the receiving end of numerous complaints. That goes for a near-saint, never mind a bit of a lad. Having sex with hundreds or thousands of girls/women inevitably would lead to instances of mis-read signals and -- notably, with so many under-age girls lying about their ages so as to get round the no-under-16s Top-of-the-Pops studio rule -- under-age sex; irrespective of how scrupulously careful a man may be.

It is the most serious indictment of our PC-buggered authorities that they have behaved in such an appallingly bigoted highly politicised manner, and heads must roll; and that could start with the police numptie who read out the crazy arrogant statement after the verdict outside the court, that 'victims' must be given a voice.

There is every sign that the witch-hunt will continue, and people will be obliged to fight against the authorities until they begin to see sense.