What do we all think about this?

BBC

Not enough evidence for a criminal conviction, so they get an injunction against them and public naming. I'm not particularly sure I like this idea and fear it may become the thin end of a very thick wedge

Thoughts of others...?

It looks like a case of jumping on the band wagon to me. The police/authorities couldn't prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, so they tries their hand at the civil 'balance of probabilities' angle.

As I say Lex, I'm not comfortable with this at all. If the authorities wish to take me to task for something, then it is up to them to prove beyond reasonable doubt to 12 good and true men that I did it. Any other route simply isn't on.

I suspect we'll be seeing an appeal here, and rightly so.

BTW, I in no way condone what these men are alleged to have done.