BRITAIN/JOHN LESLIE: Roy Greenslade on the unholy trinity which invaded John Leslie's life.
It may seem surprising that John Leslie, the TV presenter whose career has been devastated by a British press feeding frenzy, doesn't plan to seek revenge on the media.
Newspapers have dragged his reputation through the mud for 10 months, ever since he was named on TV as the anonymous man referred to in Ulrika Jonsson's autobiography as a rapist.
She refused to confirm that he was her assailant, but several tabloids decided Leslie was the guilty party and set about finding witnesses for the prosecution.
In a shameful daily scorecard, some papers outbid each other to claim that up to 20 women - who were never identified - had suffered alleged sexual assaults by Leslie.
Despite assurances from editors I spoke to that these women contacted the papers without inducements, it was an outrageous episode even by the low standards of Fleet Street's red-tops. It was trial by media.
Leslie, on legal advice, said nothing and, when some of the women were interviewed by the police, he was suspended by his employer, Granada TV.
Granada would probably have stood by him, but then came a revelation in the News of the World which undoubtedly led to his dismissal: he was pictured snorting a substance which was alleged to be cocaine.
The jobless Leslie then endured months of press speculation while the police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) sifted the evidence to decide whether he had committed any offences.
In early June there were leaks from the CPS which suggested he would be cleared and then, to the amazement of Leslie, his lawyers and most journalists, on June 18th he was charged with two counts of indecent assault against one woman.
In fairness, the press coverage from that moment on was restrained. Indeed, some titles, particularly the Daily Express, began to run stories which were sympathetic to Leslie (he has now sold his story to the paper). Belatedly, it appears that there had been something of a change of heart.
Of course, that was no help to Leslie. His emotional statement outside court yesterday was eloquent testimony to his months of anguish. So why did he let it be known through his solicitor that he won't strike back at the media?
Many lawyers believe he would have a good case for libel against Channel 5 and its presenter Matthew Wright, who "accidentally" identified him in the first place.
But the sad truth is that libel actions are expensive, legal aid cannot be provided, their outcome is a lottery, they are often very intrusive - opening up the claimant's private life to public scrutiny - and lesser levels of proof are required than in a criminal trial. He could not be certain of victory.
Though some papers overstepped the mark, with one virtually calling him a rapist in a picture caption, his chances of making a case against any of them would be slim.
Then there is the fact that he is a man of the media himself. If he is to stand any chance of rebuilding his career he has to try to reach an accommodation with the beast.
A comeback will be difficult enough for him without the additional problem of a high-profile court case with an uncertain result.
So the media will get away with their bad behaviour. It is astonishing that Channel 5 has not been the subject of an inquiry by its regulator, the Broadcasting Standards Council, though that might yet happen.
What is certain is that papers will not be held to account by their own ethical watchdog, the Press Complaints Commission.
However badly it has behaved, the price we pay for a free press is that it is free to get things wrong.
No voluntary code or law could be drawn up which would prohibit papers from this kind of behaviour without preventing them also from their proper public service role, holding governments and institutions to account.
After this fiasco there are two organisations the more responsible broadsheet press should definitely take to task: the CPS and the police.
There is an unholy trinity in Britain just now - police, CPS and tabloid press - which has led too often to the traducing of innocent people. It is time that chain was broken.