Paul Gambaccini wins CPS payout over unfounded sexual abuse …

Further proof, if it were needed, that the justice system is broken:

The BBC Radio 2 DJ Paul Gambaccini has won a payout from prosecutors over an unfounded case regarding historical sexual abuse allegations.

The American-born broadcaster was arrested in October 2013 over a claim he sexually assaulted two teenage boys. Gambaccini, 69, spent a year on bail before the case against him was dropped in what he labelled a “completely fictitious” affair.

Confidentiality clauses in the agreement mean the amount paid cannot be disclosed, sources said.

Gambaccini was arrested under Operation Yewtree, which was led by the Metropolitan police in the wake of the revelations about the paedophile Jimmy Savile.

He has described the incident as a celebrity “witch hunt”, and has previously called for rape suspects to be given anonymity until charged.

He said in 2015: “The man on the street is known to the people he has met in his life. The celebrity is known to the people he has met in his life, plus millions of others. So when you invite the public to accuse a celebrity, you have a pool of people who include not only possibly people who have been abused, but many people to whom a celebrity may have satisfied an emotional need throughout the years even without knowing it. And this is precisely what has happened.”

He said he “wasn’t surprised” to be accused, as he had previously spoken publicly about Savile’s crimes and was once pictured alongside him on a newspaper front page, creating an association in the public’s mind.

Gambaccini, who presents BBC Radio 2’s Pick of the Pops, had been a fixture on UK radio for decades before the allegations were made.

A CPS spokeswoman said: “We have reached an agreement without admission of liability”.

“No admission of liability”….astonishing! I wonder why they paid an “undisclosed sum”, then? Must be because they feel deep sympathy for Paul and wish to make a charitable donation?? I heard on Radio 4 this morning that the men in question were not even under age at the time. Who will be punished for this disgraceful act by a public body? Is this another “I was only doing my job” piece of garbage? Will they now clearly state that he is innocent or are they trying to merely imply that they have not found any evidence? In other words what impression are they going to leave with the general public by not admitting liability?