Rolf Harris has been convicted on zero evidence: merely allegation; and as usual in these cases the multiplicity of allegation is taken as corroborative when the very opposite should be the consideration in the interests of the most basic justice -- that a high-profile police-cum-media trial almost invariably attracts embellished if not invented accusations, and for a variety of often very trivial reasons (as has been researched).
It is a travesty that anyone can be convicted on mere accusation when in principle this cannot rightfully lead to a conviction even on the civil standard of proof, let alone the criminal.
Of course, there is the possibility that Rolf Harris did indeed grope some girls, but there is nothing anywhere in his background, nor anything anyone ever witnessed, to suggest this; quite the opposite. It is far more likely that the accusations are the result of one or more of various motives, not least attention-seeking, simple elaboration of memory over time to assuage mild protracted issues -- if not bogus 'recovered memory' -- and the obvious financial incentives.
These are very dark days, with a hopelessly compromised judicial system that will have to be radically reformed so that we return to the assumption of innocence until proven guilt. Currently anyone making any allegation against a male where either the accuser is female and/or sex is in some way at issue is deemed a 'victim' and by inference the accused is taken to be guilty even before charged, never mind facing a trial.