There is not a shred of truth in your assertion. In the first place Tolkien could not have been “acquitted of the charges” since there was no trial of any charges. In the second place, it is a complete untruth to say that “Police Investegators(sic) as well as Prosecuting attornies(sic) have made public statements that the charges were not credible.” The fact is that the Police submitted a file to the CPS which they would not have done had the charges not been “credible”. If you mean by “Prosecuting attornies(sic)” the Crown Prosecution Service, then your claim that “Prosecuting attornies have made public statements that the charges were not credible.” is a complete falsehood. The CPS in fact delivered a finding that to prosecute Tolkien would not have been “in the public interest” and such a finding by the CPS is in fact only possible when the evidence already is sufficient to give a strong indication that a prosecution would be successful. In other words, the finding that a prosecution would not be “in the public interest” is an indication of guilt, and not as you suggest and indication of evidence. This fact is elaborated in the CPS Code for Crown Prosecutors:
4.7 In every case where there is sufficient evidence to justify a
prosecution, prosecutors must go on to consider whether a
prosecution is required in the public interest.
The reason “did not post a link to the page which quoted from British newspapers, and the police investigators as well as Court officials” is in fact that no such link exists. And although much of the reporting has by now been scrubbed from the web record either by time or by another less “natural” process, nonetheless many links can be supplied that further show the untruth of your claims, e.g.,
In both of these reports you will find mention of the CPS "public interest’ finding, e.g.
"A police investigation was launched into the sex abuse allegations and the Crown Prosecution Service decided that there was enough evidence to put Fr Tolkien before the courts.
But by that time he was too ill to be charged."
Anyone can verify these matters for herself by entering the obvious searches into Google. But of course you knew all of this already.
And to the other commenters here who are so satisfied that “there is only one” victim, I’m afraid the facts must disabuse you also. In addition to Mr. Carrie it now emerges that even while it was protesting the unsullied instance of Tolkien it was at the same time making secret settlements with numerous other victims.
See e.g., PAUL BANKES, 54, NEWCASTLE UNDER LYME, UK here:
Or this: “The Sunday Mercury understands that the police investigation uncovered other sex abuse victims in Birmingham and in Staffordshire. A man who lives in Canada also subsequently contacted police.”
Or the mention of other settlements here in relation to events that occurred at St Peters in Eynsham (the abuse of Mr. Carrie took place at English Martyrs, Birmingham). No doubt there will be more revelations from the other jurisdictions in which Tolkien practiced in due course. Only a complete fool or a scoundrel would choose to be in the deniers camp evn now.