Michael Le Vell and Elephants

I can't say I'm surprised at the jury's verdict in the Le Vell case but what does surprise me is the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute a case which, according to their own criteria must be "in the public interest" and "have a reasonable expectation of conviction".
 
As to the second criteria, how the CPS ever thought they would get a conviction for five counts of rape when the medical evidence was that the girl in question had never been sexually penetrated astounds me.

RAPE - the offence of forcing a person, esp a woman, to submit to sexual intercourse against that person's will.

Their decision is even more puzzling when considering the history of the case; in 2011 and twice in 2012 the CPS determined there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction, no medical evidence, no forensic evidence, no supporting evidence and no witnesses! So what changed, what made the CPS consider it to be in the public interest to mount an extremely costly prosecution with no likelihood of conviction?

Jimmy Saville did!

And the whole media circus surrounding the alleged molestation of young people by 'celebrities'. Even the CPS's barrister, Eleanor Laws, felt the need in the Le Vell case to say to the jury "Is there some kind of witch hunt?" It's often said that if it looks like an elephant and smells like an elephant then it probably is an elephant - well the Le Vell case and others do look and smell like a witch hunt!

It also looks like a discredited CPS grasping at straws to atone for the fact that Jimmy Saville is in his grave and so beyond the reach of anyone save the Almighty.

What also concerns me is the ease with which anyone, celebrity or otherwise, can have their reputation ruined, their career ended, and their marriage destroyed, even if exonerated, on the un-supported say-so of some deluded, lying accuser, safe in the knowledge that she (it's usually a she) is immune from the consequences of her lies.

This cannot be fair!

A cornerstone of the entire legal process is that there should be a 'level playing field' between defence and prosecution and in cases such as Michael Le Vell there simply isn't! The field is tilted massively in favour of the prosecution. I accept that without victim anonymity many genuine cases would never come to court but hasn't the time now come when we should address the imbalance this causes and grant pre-conviction anonymity to those accused of such crimes?