SO ONCE again a decent, innocent man, along with his family, has had to suffer the protracted trauma of having to defend himself against false charges of sexual misbehaviour by a woman which apparently occurred more than 20 years ago (Ex-JP is cleared of sex charges, April 17).

This female still remains nameless, when in fact she should be named, shamed and made to repay every last penny of the huge legal cost of this case, as well as substantial compensation to Barry Sampson.

How was this case ever entertained in the first place? Why is it that those who should know better still feel it is all right to accuse men solely on the word of a woman, especially when these events occurred so long ago?

Over and over again men, only due to the good sense and understanding of juries, are released without charge; but is the woman in the case ever prosecuted or made to pay for the damage she has done? I very much doubt it.

It is all too easy for women to get men accused of sexual offences, and it is about time the legal services woke up to this fact and insisted on naming the accusers as well as the accused.

Heather Causnett,

Escrick Park Gardens,

Escrick, York.

Updated: 11:17 Wednesday, April 21, 2004