Yet, Kreemee, some sexual assaults do not leave DNA. Some assaults on a child do not involve the necessary means of obtaining DNA. Also, the child (or adult) may not say anything for several days/weeks/months/years, hence will be washed away.

Does that, by your reckoning, mean it didn't happen? Just because there is no DNA proof? This child/adult may have had nightmares about their ordeal for years, but just because there is no DNA they cannot be believed?

At the same time, I do think there should be a concrete allegation before someone is named. It isn't fair for someone to be splashed all over the newspapers and television before they've had the chance to defend themselves.

This is just such a revolting, distressing, filthy business, too horrible to comprehend.

I used to have Gary Glitter posters all over my walls as a teenager (VOMIT)  Makes me feel dirty just thinking about it - what on earth have his (and other's) victims gone through all these years?