Suddenly "you will be believed" starts sounding as absurd as it is. Why believe false accusers, Mr Policeman, when you don't believe denials of murder or fraud or drug smuggling?

So the crime of making false allegations, which I predicted 14 years ago would become the growth industry of this century, is at last being seen.

About bloody time.

Very little media coverage is given to the hundreds of successful appeals or the prosecution of liars. My friends are compiling a giant dossier of cases, with names, dates, court addresses, judicial comments, which every defence barrister should insist individual jurors are given at every trial where there is no evidence, just one person's word against another's.

In order to illustrate just how many times people should NOT be believed.

I felt that the liars in my SECOND trial, where I was acquitted on all charges, should have been prosecuted. I felt that the liar accusing Matthew Kelly (who I have still never met) in order to affect my appeal, should have been prosecuted. But it's become relentless. How about the liars in the William Roache, Michael Le Vell, Jim Davidson, Jimmy Tarbuck, Paul Gambaccini cases. It is rapidly looking ridiculous. The 14 (?) liars in the DLT cases? These criminals should be in the dock, let alone in prison.

Why not? Because, often, they might put certain police officers in the dock alongside them. "DCI Herb told me to say this, gave me that photo to produce, showed me that "map" of his house" and so on. And individual accountability is something the police do not like.

IT WILL HAPPEN, though.

Just as we have seen in Hillsborough, Plebgate, the hacking scandal.

Those who manipulate witnesses have had power for too long. Just as we saw in the Dead Troll/McCanns incident. The shadowy figures who persuade people to lie, to forge evidence ("here's a nice letter head for you to use"), to twist the facts - they will come to the attention of Mother Karma very, very soon.