These cases, crimes and trials are the most difficult, most horrendous and most devastating to process.
The crime itself is disgusting and appalling and makes my skin crawl.
If I ever caught someone doing such acts I would likely be in Gaol myself.
What makes them so difficult, is that they are essentially "trial by media", and mud sticks. Even if the party is found to have no wrong doing they will always be guilty in the eyes of the public.
Chronological issues also deeply impact on these cases, and a lot of the case becomes centred around "he said, she said" and implied observations recalled from a time period where the mind of witnesses may now be influenced by modern reflection or impressed by the media circus surrounding such a case.
Where a genuine case is to be answered for my sympathies go to the victims of such acts as innocence is lost.
Unfortunately, trail by jury will always be influenced by human emotion, which in these cases is often repugnance at the acts being presented.
How any jury can honestly claim to be calm and impartial whilst hearing such commentary is beyond the capability of most human beings.
Add to this the innate human desire towards 'tall poppy syndrome' and a celebrity accused of such crimes is essentially guilty until proven innocent (and then will still be tarred with the stigma of accusation).
In summation:
If he did (any of) it - I hope he receives the punishment he deserves.
However, the removal of artworks due to the nature of the artist is a narrow minded and knee jerk behaviour. We should not remove his existence from the records - his behaviour will long be known.
Plenty of famous artists, bands, musicians etc have skeletons in their closets that they would not wish to come to the light of the public.
