Originally Posted by
dervish
I'm a little disturbed over this. Setting to one side for a moment the allegations, it does smack of "let's have another go and find him guilty this time". What effect will it have on those who said there was "insufficient evidence" first time around? What of the allegations that pressure was applied on those affected to shut up? That surely is a worse offence. Would a proper investigation reveal full knowledge of what was going on among higher ups? What a mess.
it is a curious mindset that says “it wasn’t criminal, therefore we can’t sack him”…