VERSION|0.5.1|NAME|Edwin|DATE|1360780915|CONTENT|AA didn&#039;t tell, nobody told, not even victims, for 30(?) years. Suddenly everyone is remembering and telling. Yet all through those years there were prosecutions and increasing panic, hence the making it illegal for teacher or tutor to have relations with someone 16-18. So alleged victims had plenty of examples of people being believed etc.

All this went along with the increasing infantilising of young people, no knives, no matches, no ciggies but you can get married and join the Army and drive two wheels at 16, four at 17.

Frankly I do not know who to believe but would find it helpful if there was a requirement for some corroboration and the dismissal of negative evidence on the say so of a psychiatrist would seem wrong&#039; Someone was convicted of abuse although it was shown to be impossible for it to have taken place when and where the victim claimed, a psychiatrist said it was perfectly reasonable to remember the abuse and forget where it took place. No point in a trial really.

Moral Maze should be interesting tonight as the proposition seems to be that the defence should not defend in an abuse trial. 

I call nobody a liar but I do not see how a jury can arrive at the truth without corroboration or evidence. We do know that there are false memories, cases of maliciousness, jealousy and of gross horrendous disgusting abusers.|EMAIL|aeduin@aol.com|IP-ADDRESS|92.6.65.109|MODERATIONFLAG|