so he is innocent of the charges made against him and the jury did not believe her story of been abused.
but she should be jailed for making up these charges which could have seen him in jail for a long time.
No smoke without fire is a stupid expression for a start. That liar should be exposed because any bloke could be in a nightclub tomorrow night and end up going home with her. As a bloke I'd rather drink petrol than be in the same room as that piece of dirt.
Sorry that sounds anti-woman. Try again. As I human being ...
She must be under 18 and therefore still a child and so she cannot be named
Due to her age.
he has been cleared of al charges by a court so why does the girl still retain her anomynity? I think either both parties should have anonymity or the accuser should lose theirs if the accused is found not guilty. There are many who think he is "only found not guilty but not found innocent therefore she should keep her anonymity as "here is no smoke without fire"! This is a very unfair attitude as he is somehow never proven innocent in their twisted minds!
You cant have it both ways either one or other of the parties is lying!
