This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/may/05/bbc-stuart-hall-victims-patten

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
BBC may have to pay out to Stuart Hall victims, says Lord Patten BBC may have to pay out to Stuart Hall victims, says Lord Patten
(5 months later)
The BBC could be liable to pay compensation to victims of the veteran television presenter Stuart Hall, who admitted a string of sex offences against girls and young women, the chairman of the BBC Trust has said.The BBC could be liable to pay compensation to victims of the veteran television presenter Stuart Hall, who admitted a string of sex offences against girls and young women, the chairman of the BBC Trust has said.
Lord Patten said he expected Hall's victims to seek compensation through the courts. Asked on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show whether the corporation would be liable for compensation, Patten said: "I imagine so, but that'll be a matter for the lawyers and conceivably for the courts."Lord Patten said he expected Hall's victims to seek compensation through the courts. Asked on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show whether the corporation would be liable for compensation, Patten said: "I imagine so, but that'll be a matter for the lawyers and conceivably for the courts."
He said he had not made an estimate of the likely sums involved. "I think it would be incredible to be able to do that now because first of all what needs to happen is we need to get a grip on what actually happened and we need of course in the meantime to co-operate fully with the police," Patten said.He said he had not made an estimate of the likely sums involved. "I think it would be incredible to be able to do that now because first of all what needs to happen is we need to get a grip on what actually happened and we need of course in the meantime to co-operate fully with the police," Patten said.
Hall was described by the Crown Prosecution Service as an "opportunistic predator" after he admitted abusing six girls and young women aged between nine and 17 between 1968 and 1986. At least six of his victims have instructed Alan Collins, a partner at the law firm Pannone, to sue Hall and possibly the BBC.Hall was described by the Crown Prosecution Service as an "opportunistic predator" after he admitted abusing six girls and young women aged between nine and 17 between 1968 and 1986. At least six of his victims have instructed Alan Collins, a partner at the law firm Pannone, to sue Hall and possibly the BBC.
Patten said Hall's case was different to that of Jimmy Savile because the former was still alive. But he said there would be no second inquiry and that Dame Janet Smith, who is investigating whether the BBC was complicit in the Savile scandal, would examine the Hall case.Patten said Hall's case was different to that of Jimmy Savile because the former was still alive. But he said there would be no second inquiry and that Dame Janet Smith, who is investigating whether the BBC was complicit in the Savile scandal, would examine the Hall case.
Patten's remarks came as the former Metropolitan police commissioner Lord Blair said it was right to name those arrested in sex crime inquiries as a way of encouraging more victims to come forward.Patten's remarks came as the former Metropolitan police commissioner Lord Blair said it was right to name those arrested in sex crime inquiries as a way of encouraging more victims to come forward.
Blair told Sky News: "If you take the Stuart Hall case – if he had not been named, the victims would not have come forward. It's as simple as that, we have to do it. It is a very difficult issue but it has to be that people are named in these cases."Blair told Sky News: "If you take the Stuart Hall case – if he had not been named, the victims would not have come forward. It's as simple as that, we have to do it. It is a very difficult issue but it has to be that people are named in these cases."
Last week Andy Trotter, chairman of the communications advisory group of the Association of Chief Police Officers, said suspects could be named if it would help the prevention or detection of crime. He also said police should confirm the name of those charged with an offence, though this will not apply in exceptional circumstances.Last week Andy Trotter, chairman of the communications advisory group of the Association of Chief Police Officers, said suspects could be named if it would help the prevention or detection of crime. He also said police should confirm the name of those charged with an offence, though this will not apply in exceptional circumstances.
The guidance from Trotter followed the decision by Neil Brunton, the deputy chief constable of Warwickshire, initially not to name a retired officer charged with stealing £113,000 from the constabulary's former headquarters. Brunton explained the decision by tweeting: "The policy was recently changed to align with national policy post-Leveson."The guidance from Trotter followed the decision by Neil Brunton, the deputy chief constable of Warwickshire, initially not to name a retired officer charged with stealing £113,000 from the constabulary's former headquarters. Brunton explained the decision by tweeting: "The policy was recently changed to align with national policy post-Leveson."
Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, who was one of the assessors on the Leveson inquiry, told the Andrew Marr Show: "Lord Justice Leveson did not call, by the way, for a blanket ban on confirming the names of people arrested. There are times when it's very important in the public interest that there is an opportunity for witnesses and other victims to come forward or can actually be in the suspect's interests."Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, who was one of the assessors on the Leveson inquiry, told the Andrew Marr Show: "Lord Justice Leveson did not call, by the way, for a blanket ban on confirming the names of people arrested. There are times when it's very important in the public interest that there is an opportunity for witnesses and other victims to come forward or can actually be in the suspect's interests."
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.