Can his title 'sir' be stripped now that he is dead? Or is what's done, done?
I don't think the title (as a whole) really means much these days anyway. Celebrities and showbiz relics are given titles left, right.and centre whereas genuinely selfless people doing good.things, without money or fame, are ignored. I think this is a good example of just how.meaningless these titles are.
The title is only applicable during lifetime for those particulars so he technically wasnt a Sir anymore as soon as he died.
I have absolutely no problem at all with all of this being made public after his death, my only reservation was that he's not around to defend himself but based on the sheer volume of accusations and how all the details tie up, that doesn't concern me now.
I think there's a very valid point in bringing the truth out now. Yes he was a national icon and quite a few people will feel almost betrayed that a fond childhood memory has been sullied. But at the end of the day, it was all based on lies. He doesn't deserve an ounce of respect at this stage. The victims absolutely have the right to be heard and for some, seeing the truth come to light may be more healing than any kind of therapy. If it helps even one victim then it was worth it. I don't believe in argument that he's dead now, can't hurt anyone so why bring it up. Its all.about the victims, not him or anyone else's flawed perception of him. If the BBC etc take a long look at themselves, that's great but only a secondary factor for me. The only people I feel sorry for are his family so long as they weren't aware of it, it has to be a really difficult time for them.