**caution**opinion_ahead wrote:

Well ... I must say I'm very surprised.  I can't see why the jury were out so long if there was no element of doubt.

As someone said earlier in the thread, approx 38hrs isn't overly long to decide on 12 counts, and to deliver a unanimous verdict. Are you suggesting that juries have the clock called on them? So if no verdict has been reached after a set amount of time, what next, automatic not guilty or retrial?

As I understand it, there was no evidence apart from the accusers' complaints.  No one else had seen any of the assaults, even though some of them happened in crowded places.  None of the accusers told anyone that anything had happened, either at the time or later, until the police started investigating other famous people.  None of them recorded events in diaries they kept at the time.  No evidence was put forward that others close to them noticed anything was amiss. 

His daughter's friend confided in her brother in 1996, and told the rest of her family the following year.

To me, her evidence was pivotal to the whole case. It wasn't disputed that he made it clear he found her sexually attractive as a 13yr old, so asking us to believe that he kept those urges under control for another 5yrs before indulging in a full 'relationship', is one reason why I'm more inclined to believe her version than his.