You will remember that this whole tawdry affair began after Jonsson revealed, in her autobiography, that she??d been raped in 1988 by a TV presenter whom she declined to name. Almost immediately rumours started flying in showbiz and media circles, and shortly afterwards the Five presenter and former pop music hack Matthew Wright inadvertently named Leslie on his TV show.
Ulrika Jonsson was eloquently silent, neither confirming nor denying Leslie??s culpability. In her shoes I might have piped up if the media had got (and Leslie was most certainly ??got??, lock, stock and barrel) entirely the wrong man.
This is a very weird story. Last Thursday, as the news emerged that the charges had been dropped and that Leslie was free to leave the court ??without a stain on his character??, Jonsson had this to say: ??This is getting on my f------ tits now. It??s completely crazy. This case has nothing to do with me. I never accused anybody of anything.?? Which is perfectly true, in the sense that she never named her assailant, but completely false in the sense that it was her initial accusation, followed by Wright??s outing, that encouraged an alarming number of other women (15, to be precise) to come forward with accusations of their own (all of which Leslie denied) and, in one case, to press charges.
The question is, what motivated these women. Are they all fantasists? Can they really all have been so desperate for a quick buck from the tabloids that they simply made their stories up? Were they all mad ?? or at least mad enough to feel piqued when the red roses failed to materialise the morning after? Leslie is, to my mind, an unattractive piece of work. He is also clearly a man who likes rough sex. This may be unlovely, but it??s hardly uncommon and hardly a crime. If you put a beefy 6ft 5in man who likes rough sex in the company of women who are happy to drop their knickers at the merest whiff of a Blue Peter badge for the unparalleled delight of having done it with a celebrity, there will be tears before bedtime, because most women don??t like being, or feeling, brutalised.
None of the 15 women accused Leslie of rape, but rather of being over-forceful, all of which allegedly took place on ??dates?? or at ??parties??. There is a cautionary tale here, no matter how un-PC, which is that if you behave like a slapper, you get treated like one. If you don??t want to run that risk, don??t go up to strange men??s hotel rooms just because they??ve asked you and they seem nice enough on the telly.
Advertisement
??He treated me like a piece of meat,?? said one of Leslie??s alleged victims. Well, yes ?? it tends to happen if you have ??piece of meat?? practically tattooed on your forehead and are happy to repair to the bedroom minutes after meeting.
As in the case of date-rape, this kind of behaviour makes it extremely hard, not to say impossible, for the law to rule on consensual sex between adults when that sex turns nasty or not to one??s liking. This is not to suggest that women who strip down and hop into bed with Mr X and have a horrible time deserve what they get ?? it is, rather, to suggest that they might consider keeping their kit on instead of, as in one case last year, changing their mind right on the point of penetration.
I know all about A Woman??s Right To Say No etc, but I do find it extraordinary that some people can only make up their mind about sex if they??re already naked. Most of us can make the decision while clothed.
There don??t seem to be any winners in this case. Leslie, unfairly portrayed by the press as a coke-snorting sex beast (as though his fellow TV presenters were impartial to anything stronger than black coffee ?? Frank Bough anyone?), has been professionally and personally tainted by this grim little episode, and despite the judge??s statement, the stain might not come out.
It is hard to disagree with Leslie when he says that he??s been ??to hell and back??, and it would be nice to be able to use his case to construct a (necessary) argument pointing out that the greatest revenge a woman can have on a man is falsely to accuse him of sexual violence, especially if that man is in the public eye. There is a strong case to be made for granting the accused initial anonymity.
Advertisement
Unfortunately, this case isn??t it. Everybody loses, especially women: yet another public figure is exonerated despite having a veritable army of alleged victims. Now that Leslie??s in the clear, his accusers look like liars at best, or the kind of desperate bints who??ll do anything for what they understand to be ??fame??.
Nevertheless, the women??s testimonies are all now discredited, and 15 women who claim to have suffered at his hands are effectively disbelieved. This is very bad news. If I??d been assaulted and had followed this case closely, I wouldn??t exactly take heart over my chances of getting justice.
Meanwhile, John Leslie, richer by ??100,000 plus thanks to a deal with Express Newspapers and also possibly about to strike a television deal with Sky, is a happy man. It would be nice to feel pleased for him, but I can??t manage it.