Started, I believe, with the best intentions - capturing those who abused children, often orphans, in care homes. It became necessary (obviously) to assist victims and witnesses and police, certain of the guilt of the accused, did that - understandably but dangerous.

Because then ambitious and essentially corrupt cops started seeing they could get promotion, praise and increased budgets by attacking high profile names.

That got the media on side - always after a good story and equally prepared to exaggerate or colour up stories to make better headlines (and, as far as prosecution were concerned, shock and horrify jurors). Judges got in on the act - stiffer sentences; an excuse for right wing moralising. Don't think judges are immune to wanting good publicity as they primp and preen in silly costumes and ridiculous wigs in front of mirrors (though I gather the vast quantities of alcohol consumed in chambers has been cut back).

Recently the public have become surfeited on these predictable horror tales.

The very recent story of hundreds of arrests in Scotland for child abuse has been greeted by a yawn of public boredom and not the expected shock and horror.

We see people like Stuart Hall and Max Clifford get acquitted second time around.

Neil Fox, Nigel Evans, Corrie stars and others leave courts free and without stains on their character.

Cliff, Gambo, Tremeloes and others don't even go to trial.

And cases like David Bryant make the public aware that the judicial system is broken - even if it does get it right in a tiny percentage of appeals.