I thought it was definite because of the methodical way it was investigated, his flight, the way he persuaded one girl's mother to put her on the pill and the way the victims reacted. Therefore, a persons word was backed up by other circumstances and the fact that he absconded to France supposedly as he claimed because his layers didn't have time to prepare a defence. After plenty of time, he didn't return......

Now, the word is that complainers must be believed and in the light of that, how would you defend yourself in the scenario I presented because after an investigation and your continued denials, those prosecuting still went forward on the basis "we'll let a jury decide".