FACT

David Walliams is innocent until proven guilty. The allegations made against @davidwalliams are serious & will inevitably attract considerable public attention. But allegations, however disturbing, are not proof of wrongdoing. What concerns me is the increasingly familiar spectacle of an individual being subjected to public judgment before any criminal offence has been established, let alone proven. In the court of public opinion, Walliams now appears to be guilty until proven innocent. I know from bitter personal experience the devastating consequences that can follow when allegations are treated as established facts. Reputations, careers, families & lives can be destroyed long before the truth has been properly examined. Those making allegations have every right to be heard & their accounts deserve to be treated seriously. Equally, the person accused has a fundamental right to fairness, due process & the presumption of innocence. Freedom of the press is sacrosanct and vital, but so too is responsible reporting & a recognition of the enormous power of publicity to inflict lasting damage. I make no judgment about the truth or otherwise of the allegations against Mr Walliams. That is precisely the point. Neither should anyone else presume his guilt. The presumption of innocence must mean something in practice, not merely in principle, & it should not be abandoned whenever an allegation becomes a headline. theguardian.com/tv-and-radio…

The same old obfuscation from the Ministry of Justice, & further proof that victims of malicious, deliberate false allegations are an inconvenience to @andyburnham’s Government. Thank you to @alexlmayer for asking @AlexJJNorris & @MoJGovUK what assessment has been made of the impact of the Victims and Courts Act 2026 on those falsely accused of serious crimes. The response from @AlexDaviesJones? “No separate assessment was made of people described as having been falsely accused of a crime.” An extraordinary admission. Carl Beech falsely accused me & others of the most heinous crimes - child sexual abuse & murder. I lost my home, my livelihood & my reputation, & received credible death threats. Yet when Beech was released from prison, I was not even informed - neither were the families of Lord Brittan or Lord Bramall. The Government acknowledges that malicious false allegations can constitute a criminal offence, yet still refuses to answer whether those directly harmed will be recognised as victims under the new legislation. How can the Government recognise the crime but fail to recognise its victims? Those whose lives have been devastated by calculated, criminal falsehoods deserve more than evasive answers & bureaucratic indifference. We deserve recognition, protection & a substantive answer. @FACTukorg @KemiBadenoch members.parliament.uk/member…

Has Sir Mark Rowley learnt nothing from the catastrophic failures of Operation Midland? Sir Richard Henriques’ message was unequivocal: police must investigate allegations impartially, not presume guilt. Yet the Met Commissioner takes to the airwaves speculating that more allegations against Russell Brand may emerge & “you will be believed”, inviting further media speculation & trial by publicity. Complainants must be treated with dignity, respect & taken seriously. But being taken seriously is not the same as being automatically believed. Promising “you will be believed” before examining the evidence risks prejudging the very facts police are supposed to establish. The presumption of innocence the foundation of justice, not an inconvenience. Has Sir Mark Rowley - & @metpoliceuk -learnt nothing?