But I would imagine it would be incredibly difficult to prove anything against an individual.

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned previously but Gary Glitter has again been charged with crimes of a sexual nature. What has made the alleged victims come forward now? I know the media have been saying that the Savile stuff has empowered more victims of sex abuse come forward but GG was done for noncing about 15 years ago in a well publicised case, why ony come forward now?

Equally it may well help the organisations involved realise where things went wrong previously, thus preventing it happening again.
It's pointless simply stating he was vile and did this that and the other unless we actually learn something from what we know now.

So how do you explain the ones that have not been charged and no further action will be taken? I give you Freddie Starr as a starter for 10.
I refer back to my earlier comments which explain IMHO the workings of the CPS. They are under severe pressure with this set of allegations to get it right. They have the entire case file in their possession. Not anyone on this forum (that bit I am simply assuming) and the base their decision on that file. It's not based on the name of the suspect.

"It's not based on the name of the suspect."

I understand that but I suspect that there is a small element of clawing in a "name" for publicity's sake, publicity for new "victims" (rightly or wrongly) to come forward and publicity for a government department that like all others is facing annual reviews of whether they are really necessary or not, what better response to a budget question than "Well we've convicted xxx publicly known sex offenders this year" and what worse response to the same question than "Well we lost every bloody sex offence case last year, especially the famous ones".

As a for instance one of Jimmy Saviles mates who acted as his driver and often procurer of "victims" was convicted of sex offences of his own a couple of years ago, did it get publicity, it got a mention on the news that night and then nothing else, have we had a huge enquiry into how many other "victims" this bloke procured, no, because he wasn't a "name" and the conviction was enough with no need to seek out other accusers or to take the matter any further.

So in that respect, yes, the "names" are being treated differently.

I am not sure about now, but in the past the CPS was always seen as the choice of last resort / desperation for those who couldn't get a training contract or pupillage anywhere else.

Which might say a lot about the quality of people making decisions there.

When Allison Saunders was appointed DPP, she spent the word 'pupillage' wrong on her profile on the CPS website.

Tie you down in jail Rolf, tie you down in jail.....

Absolutely gutted about Rolf. Thought he was one of the good guys.

Going to have the throw me Rolf Harris CD out now. Two Little Boys just won't be the same anymore

I must admit it's awful that someone I used to like on TV as kid has turned out to be so bad. He seemed such a good guy, unlike Savile who always looked and sounded like a wierdo.

I find it really unnerving and sinister when they show all the old footage of these offenders from years ago knowing what we do now. Savile pushing patients round hospital wards in wheelchairs and Harris in a swimming pool with a load of kids. You just think ''I wonder what happened behind closed doors after the cameras left?''

The most sickening thing is knowing now that Jim'll Fix, a show he controlled for 20 years on the bloody BBC, was probably devised entirely by Savile as a vehicle for his abuse. The sheer front and audacity of the man was staggering.

It wasn't just me then that thought Savile was weird. As a kid I could never understand why he was on Top of the Pop's and later on when various documentaries shed some light on how he lived I never thought "eccentric", just weird. His persona on Jim'll fix it came across as more normal but everything else he did was just down right odd.

First things first, I think Harris was utterly wrong for having a sexual relationship with his daughters best friend. I think he's a sleazy dog. I think he used and abused his celebrity status to have sex with hundreds, if not thousands of women and girls.

But I think the charges, trial and verdict are a complete travesty of justice. When reading the accounts of the alleged victims I don't feel sympathy for them, I feel sympathy for Harris and his family for having to go through this utter BS.