jezzaargh, I believe the Hawthorn review was carried out with due sensitivity and concern for the participants, and they almost certainly didn't want any publicity or to have to repeat the review in the glare of public spotlights, but publicity is undoubtedly what they now must endure. But any "public interests" the leaky journos had were, I feel quite sure, easily swamped by considerations of personal bylines under some sensational reportage.
I reckon that when the allegations surfaced, most if not all Dockerlanders were ready to hang, draw and quarter all three of the alleged perpetrators, so horrible were the details reported. No one in their right mind wants to believe that such things that were alleged could happen in near-current times.
Clarkson and Fagan have strongly denied all allegations, which is surely to be expected. But Clarkson has also claimed that so far the process of dealing with them has been anything but fair natural justice, and considering that the reputations of these three men have clearly been trashed by the media publicity, it seems reasonable to me to think he has a point.
I'm not saying I disbelieve the allegations, or that I think the three men are innocent. What I am saying is that I believe they are innocent unless proven guilty in a fair and just process.
