Heath unable to defend himself
For many months now we have had investigations going on into the late Edward Heath and his alleged offences against young people.
This week comes an announcement from the investigating police force that were he alive he would be interviewed under caution.
Already solicitors are briefing the media that they will be taking legal action to get compensation for alleged victims. Quite how this will work I’m not sure, probably because I’m only an ordinary Black Country bloke, but whereas Mr Heath is still dead, so can’t answer these allegations, I am aware that you can’t slander a dead man. He’s unable to defend himself because he’s not here. I’m not saying that the accusers are lying but where is any proof?
You might not have liked him as a man or political figure but without evidential proof there hardly seems to be a case. A case where the onus is on the prosecution to provide evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.
How this can happen when the accused cannot argue his case in a court?
Whatever happened to the principles of justice enshrined by our courts and parliament?
I’m not trying to defend Mr Heath, I’ve never been a supporter of him, but how can it be right or fair that accusations against a dead man can be investigated with such fervour with very little, if any, evidence?
He’s not the first, not will he be the last, public figure to be ‘investigated’ after death. It is to be hoped that ‘live’ investigations are to be treated with such due diligence in future.
M Gough
Wombourne
