Joe. without any phsyical evidence how can a jury find him gulity ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ then?
(At the risk of being abused for being a former Police Officer).
Like everyone else here I do not know what evidence was available in that case. However, the CPS (of whom I have little experience, as I retired just after they were 'invented' and of whom I even less respect) decided, I am sure on advice from a QC, that there was enough evidence upon which a jury could convict and it was for that reason they prosecuted.
That's the ‘official answer'. However I have a gut feeling that they will probably prosecute in similar cases where they have practically no evidence so show they are not biased ! They do the same when a police officer is accused. “Give it a run” as they say. The officer who pushed the paper seller, who then died of a heart attack (natural causes) was a case in point. He was acquitted and probably would not have been prosecuted if he had been anybody but a police officer.
In the case in which the broadcaster pleaded guilty. I suspect there might have been evidence of similar acts using the same MO, by girls who were unconnected with each other. A jury could in such a case might decide that a number of girls would be unable to tell the same story if it wasn’t true. That might mean 'no reasonable doubt'. Just an opinion, based on experience not facts.