Trial by Media

There is a kind of frenzy at the moment in international media about people in the entertainment industry and their personal behaviour towards other people. Many previously admired - at least professionally - figures are now reviled and are being made into pariahs; their films are being cancelled and/or re-cast, their companies are struggling to survive and their friends and family are abandoning them post haste. And they all have something in common: they have not yet been convicted of anything in a court of law.

So why do people, including (as reported in the media a few days ago) the actress Hayley Atwell, feel they have a right to demand punishment for an individual - in this case Harvey Weinstein - before he is convicted of specific crimes of any description? What we have a right to demand is that he is tried in a court of law, and that his accusers are given the opportunity to present the evidence that exists proving that he is a sexual predator who has abused people (in his case women) by using his standing as a film producer to demand and receive sexual gratification of one kind or another. At the moment and until he is tried he should be considered innocent until proven guilty, at least from the point of view of punishment.

This is not in any way to suggest that Harvey Weinstein or anybody else accused of serious sexual misconduct should be treated as before the allegations, nor that life should continue as if nothing has happened. When we are faced with accusations we must take them seriously, but not uniformly at face value - not everyone who makes an accusation is necessarily telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If the allegations are of a serious nature - not the 'he/she fleetingly touched my knee' variety - then they must be referred to and investigated by officers of the law and, provided the evidence is there, the matter must be tried in a court of law. Whilst nothing is foolproof, a convicted abuser cannot then hide or pretend that nothing happened.

What really annoys me is that some people are using the timing to attack other famous people with claims and innuendoes, often claiming that they have suffered for years keeping something inside because the other person was so important/rich/powerful and they thought they would not be believed. No, they say, they have no evidence to support their claim, but why would anyone put themselves through an ordeal such as this if they were not telling the truth; then they smile fetchingly at any available camera.

Isn't it also funny that some of the people who accuse have wasted no opportunity in the recent past to be photographed with their alleged abuser smiling radiantly, looking happy and relaxed - why?

Of course it's time that people showed proper respect to one another, irrespective of their perceived power and influence, so that we all behave correctly towards others. Isn't it also time, though, to start being a bit more realistic about human nature and its ugly side, to not expect that people will behave the way we want them to all the time, to protect ourselves a little bit? Paddington Bear may see the good in everyone but you and I should know better!