UK & World News
- 2 December 2012, 1:23
Former Corrie Star Faces Child Sex Charges
Former Coronation Street actor Andrew Lancel will appear in court later this month to face five counts of indecent assault on a child under 16.
Merseyside Police said the 42-year-old had been charged under his real name - Andrew Watkinson.
He was charged under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
The charges relate to "historic" child sex offences, the force said.
Lancel, from Gateacre in Liverpool, is best known for his appearance as the scheming businessman Frank Foster in the ITV1 soap.
His Corrie career began in November 2010 when he was cast as Foster, a business associate of Carla Connor.
Lancel's role ended in March this year when his character was found murdered.
Lancel also played DI Neil Manson in The Bill, and starred alongside Helen Baxendale in Cardiac Arrest.
He has been bailed to appear at South Sefton Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, December 19.
what do you think?
shaun spencer
How come they dont remand sex offenders anymore.
Para999Tom
cos its historic. also if they release the name of the so called offender they should also release the name of the so called victim.
Roy E Millington
quite right Paraits not fair on the alleged offender, and isnt it funny all these people only come forward when money is mentioned or the person cannot defend themselves?
shaun spencer
Im not referring to this case but others is well.sex offenders used to be remanded.
stewgwyn
Not found guilty yet, Shaun ?
Vladtheinhaler .
Stewgwyn, you don't have to be guilty, to be remanded. That's the whole point in remanding someone, so they are kept from the public while evidence is gathered and a court date is set.It protects us from people who might be guilty, but have yet to be tried.
shaun spencer
Yes ive been amazed in the past few weeks at the peaple getting bailed with what i think are horrible crimes.proberly simply due to overcrowded prisons
Gordon Wright
Shaun, The court will normally only place someone on remand for certain reasons, for example. (1) There is a danger that he/she will commit similar offences while awaiting trial. (2)They will try to intimidate or influence witnesses. (3) They will abscond before the trial takes place. The defence team must have been able to convince the court that the accused was unlikely to do any of the above. Hope this clarifies matters for you..........
Baker101
Living up to his despicable character's reputation, I see. Who says soap actors can't play anyone but themselves these days?
Baker101
Did I say something wrong?
Lorgar Aurelian
I think that the point is that he hasn't been found guilty of anything yet.
Bernadette Griffin
Yes you did.
prterry
I hope ITV makes an in-depth documentary about this. Also, that the families sue ITV for every penny they've got.
movvi
Of course, if guilty, throw the book at him (and a few stones and fireworks if you like). If this historic abuse, however, was years ago and he was a 16 year old boy fooling about with his 15 year old girlfriend, or a 20 year old in a club hoodwinked by a 15 year old looking more like 18, then it could be another bandwagonner wanting to make a fast buck here. Why do we repeatedly name suspects? It drives me mad.
Dave Harrison
Movvi. A very reasoned response and one which I fully agree with. In all cases involving sexual offences why do we persist in naming the alleged offender whilst allowing the alleged victim to remain anonymous. All this does is feeds the rumour mill
Lorgar Aurelian
Either name both or both remain anonymous. I've never understood why that's so difficult to implement.
Bernadette Griffin
It is a very reasoned response. The word historic should be the big give away.
happymike CHESTER
They are picking on the small time .POLICE do your job properly go for the real paedophiles you know them all check your history files stop going for easy meat like the last time.
GillieLouise
I cant help wondering if this will end up being the same case as his fellow actor on Coronation Street. We cant judge yet and should leave it to the courts to decide.
Daniel smith
This comment has been removed for violations of our Terms and Conditions.
Andrea Hill
god cant believe tjis, he quite dishy
Dan Jones
10:09am on 1/12/2012
This comment has been removed for violations of our Terms and Conditions.