The only thing the general public can know that Craig McLachlan is guilty of is the obvious fact that he plays the highly unlikely and insipid Doctor Blake in a B grade ABC production, repeats of which have thankfully been withdrawn. We cannot know, probably never will know, whether or not he is guilty of the sexual predation he has been accused of.

Once upon a time, when Australia was a fairly sane place, a victim made a complaint to police, who investigated the complaint, passed it on to the DPS if warranted and a court reporter was able to pass the news onto Joe Public. There was a trial where judgement was made or there was a guilty plea merely requiring sentence.

Not any more. Any unknown female in the entertainment industry can now blurt it all out to the media, and a career, reputation and life is ruined before a man in the industry knows what has hit him. We accepted that Rolf Harris did what at he did because his case came about in the 'old fashioned' innocent-until-proved-guilty way. But now, from Harvey Weinstein to Geoffrey Rush or Don Burke and Craig McLachlan (Michael Douglas has had aspersions cast at him this morning's media) unknown wannabes and some better know performers who suddenly remember who groped them 'thirty years down the track', can, in cahoots with the stinking media, bring a persons life into disrepute. Some of these harpies don't even have their names mentioned.

The cessation of natural justice and innocent until guilty has arrived. Given the chuntering on about 2018 being the 'year of women', it is easy to believe that all this indiscriminate trashing of reputations is part of it. There is no sign of imminent legal action. Just smears and innuendo. Men no longer seem to have rights.

ttbn, men have not had rights since the Wimmins Movement came into town, with Lionel Murphy, Gough Whitlam, the Family Law Act (1974) et al, led around by the vested interests ably assisted by the Electronic Whorehouse.

Re: Family Law Act, if you have a vagina, no matter what the other evidence before the court, the person in the court proceedings ie. Jones v Jones, the one with female genitalia will win in the end. As a sole parent Dad who brought up 2 sons alone, the Child Support Agency - against all evidence contrary will in every instance give preference to the parent without a penis.

25 years after the event, with Taxation files and such submitted to the courts to prove her assets, the boys mother still owes them Child Support monies which I suspect will never be chased up by CSA/ATO. Different story if you are the bloke owing the CSA though.

When I see a female Fitter/Boilermaker alongside me on the next Pilbara shutdown, swinging a 7 pound hammer, grovelling through oil up to her waist, covered in grease and iron ore dust...then I'll probably agree with 'equality' and paying her the commensurate $. I don't care if you're covered in tattoos and look like your face has gone head first into someones fishing tackle box.

The suicide rates amongst male 'non custodial parents' rises every year, but we just spent $124 Million on a postal parasite...sorry plebiscite, about who is going to marry their cat (which is next in line after the 72 recognised "sexual identities" we currently are supposed to recognise).

The family unit has been steadily eroded and diluted by enactments (laws) and such, not strengthened. It makes me chuckle though when sitting outside the courts or nearby cafes, you overhear the faded old bull dykes and their ilk cry into their cups of coffee,..."Oh we're so sorry, we didn't see the effects of all this would have on our grandkids when we marched down ANZAC Parade arm in arm with Germaine Greer all those years ago."

As far as I'm concerned, if the lady did not report it to authorities with in hours, either it did not happen, or did so with their complete consent.

If the career benefits hoped for when performing do not appear, it is then too late to scream abuse, it simply means the bait was not good enough to hook the prize.

Get over it girls, your anatomy is not all that valuable, & you have proved it with your actions.

Craig McLachlan is being accused of indecent assault and
sexual harrassment by not one but three women who are being
backed and their testimonies apparently supported
by the rest of the
cast and crew of the Rocky Horror Show who
have witnessed the goings on. The women at the time did
complain to Management about all this, but nothing was
done.

Its now in the hands of
the authorities to investigate the accusations. And we'll
see what comes out in the wash. As we did with Rolf Harris
and others who also denied everything at the time.

Mr McLachlan has been replaced in The Rocky Horror Show.
However, in all fairness,
we should wait and see what happens next before
making judgements about his guilt or innocence.

Here's a link that explains the situation:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-08/craig-mclachlan-accused-of-indecent-assault-sexual-harrassment/9304452

Hi there TTBN...

You've covered the Topic admirably in my opinion. One of the important tenets in our (British) legal system; is the 'presumption of innocence' and by extension, 'Everyone is entitled to his day in a Court of Law'. An individual can have their life utterly ruined for all time, purely by innuendo allusion and aspersion, without them being given the benefit to have it tested, in a properly convened Law Court. Those learned members of the judiciary who sit in Equity, must realise what harm may come, when an innocent is defamed?

Perhaps we should consider returning to instruments like the 16th Century 'Gossip's Bridle' or the 'Widows Dunking Stool' or similar, for those individuals who like convicting others via innuendo.

G'day there ALBIE MANTON in DARWIN...

Mate I always like reading your 'Posts' simply because they're so imbedded with common sense. And here's another real 'gem' '...since the Wimmins (sic) Movement came to town with Messrs MURPHY & WHITLAM, the Family Law Act (1974) et al...'? There's no doubt my friend when you take aim and fire, you always hit with your 'Double Tap' centre mass! I thought there was a general prohibition for some corpulent Dykes, from wearing Body Armour?

Then Albie me ol' mate, you went and spoiled it all by mentioning that, that, 'female' person - Germaine QUEER (sic)? Spot on as always!