NOW that former deputy speaker of the House of Commons Nigel Evans has been cleared of a string of sex abuse charges, it is perhaps time to start asking some tough questions of the Crown Prosecution Service.
The inconsistencies in the evidence against the former Conservative MP became more glaringly apparent the longer the case went on.
And the jury unanimously acquitted him on all charges.
Surely it is now time to take a closer look at how and why this case actually got to court in the first place.
This is the third 'celebrity' case, after those of Michael Le Vell and William Roache, where there has been a massive amount of publicity before and during the trial. Yet in all cases a jury, after hearing all the evidence, has found them not guilty on all charges.
There must be a concern that following the Jimmy Savile revelations here is such pressure on the police and CPS to not allow those in the public eye to escape justice that cases are being brought without the usual checks and balance being made first.
The CPS decides to bring a case to court if there is a realistic prospect of conviction.
Yet all the three cases mentioned, they seemed to have been brought before court on only the flimsiest of evidence. Surely the tests whether or not prosecute have to be as rigorous as ever, even if those facing the allegations are in the public eye.