I have to try and spring to Scott's defence. There were no charges in this case and there was insufficient evidence. It seems like this is one persons word against another and we have the presumption of innocence until proven guilty the last time I looked. The police probe was 10 years ago and the interview under caution was public record so why was no action taken in the intervening 10 years?
Fellow radio presenters aren't coming out with anger at these crimes but surprise at the sacking suggesting an amount of sympathy and this couple's with Scott being open about a chaotic period in his life involving substance abuse where relationship choices may have been ill considered.
I think if we stand by the sacking maybe it sets a precedent that any allegation against a celeb is taken as proof despite not having evidence to meet the criminal charge threshold and where would that leave us?
This seems to be the last act of an outgoing DG for whatever reason and I am thinking maybe in time Scott may get a large pay out for this.