dubai_phil Posted 29 August, 2013 Posted 29 August, 2013 Sorry, still having trouble believeing this. I know the CPS clearly think they have the evidence on him (they'd better have; mud like this sticks forever, especially if it is dropped or acquitted due to "lack of evidence"), but its simply too painful for me to countenance that the singer of "Two Little Boys", which I have sung all four of my babies to sleep to, is a kiddie fiddler. Not to mention Jake the P...... Oh good grief even the dirty raincoat when he was on ToTP
Whitey Grandad Posted 29 August, 2013 Posted 29 August, 2013 Not to mention Jake the P...... Oh good grief even the dirty raincoat when he was on ToTP The big question is... ...what was the third leg made of?
WindsorSaint Posted 29 August, 2013 Posted 29 August, 2013 The big question is... ...what was the third leg made of? Can you tell what it is yet?
Badger Posted 29 August, 2013 Posted 29 August, 2013 I've said this before - I have good reasons to suspect there's some truth in these allegations. Not directed at me, you must understand, but at a damce troupe I was managing. They were all 'over age' and it was all not very subtle suggestive comments, nothing more...... Not to mention Jake the P...... Oh good grief even the dirty raincoat when he was on ToTP Surprised no one has mentioned his other fetish in song " tie me kangaroo down...".
Manuel Posted 29 August, 2013 Posted 29 August, 2013 Rolf Harris has been charged with nine counts of indecent assault and four of making indecent images of children.... 'Making' images of children? Are we talking 20 foot high paintings here?
Jonnyboy Posted 29 August, 2013 Posted 29 August, 2013 All we need now is for Rod, Jane and Freddy to be arrested and my childhood memories will be completely shot to pieces... Or a facebook quote I saw earlier said in response to who's next: "If Mr Benn gets charged, that's it, I'm topping meself."
Badger Posted 29 August, 2013 Posted 29 August, 2013 Or a facebook quote I saw earlier said in response to who's next: "If Mr Benn gets charged, that's it, I'm topping meself." Anthony Wedgewood Benn, or Tony Benn as he used to be, now that would be a revelation !
WindsorSaint Posted 10 September, 2013 Posted 10 September, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24032449
Bearsy Posted 10 September, 2013 Posted 10 September, 2013 feel a bit bad for kevin, shouldn't they lie detector these birds before dragging everyone to court if there is no evidences? I like what his defence lawyer said hahaha! Mr Williamson told the jury that while Le Vell might be described as a "weak, stupid and drunk man" and a "bad husband", he was not a child rapist. cheers lawyer!
Badger Posted 10 September, 2013 Posted 10 September, 2013 So now it rests with Bill Roach (Ken Barlow) to try and take the 'Len Fairclough Award' for fiddling on the street.
bridge too far Posted 10 September, 2013 Posted 10 September, 2013 Strangely, I've just been showing my granddaughter some photos of me when I was dancing. I decided not to show her the ones of me with Savile and Rolf Harris
alpine_saint Posted 11 September, 2013 Posted 11 September, 2013 Strangely, I've just been showing my granddaughter some photos of me when I was dancing. I decided not to show her the ones of me with Savile and Rolf Harris Rolf Harris hasnt been found guilty of anything, and Saville has been able to face all the accusors that suddenly emerged after his death.
OldNick Posted 11 September, 2013 Posted 11 September, 2013 Rolf Harris hasnt been found guilty of anything, and Saville has been able to face all the accusors that suddenly emerged after his death.[/quote). I could not feel comfortable defending such people.
Hatch Posted 31 October, 2013 Posted 31 October, 2013 two more Yewtree arrests recently . age 64 and 74 When I did a twitter search it came up with two names, Edmonds and Cleese.
View From The Top Posted 31 October, 2013 Posted 31 October, 2013 two more Yewtree arrests recently . age 64 and 74 When I did a twitter search it came up with two names, Edmonds and Cleese. 1st one wouldn't surprise me the latter would leave me feeling rather gutted.
trousers Posted 1 November, 2013 Posted 1 November, 2013 @BBCBreaking: BBC broadcaster Paul Gambaccini has been arrested on suspicion of historical sexual offences http://t.co/PA4k8JSf2a
aintforever Posted 1 November, 2013 Posted 1 November, 2013 It's getting rather tiresome all these people who wait 30 years and then accuse someone of touching their ass or something. I can understand a child being afraid to report something but these people have been adults a long time now yet chose to keep quiet and let these "abusers" supposedly carry on and do the same to other people (if they are guilty). Has more than a wiff of compo about it.
egg Posted 1 November, 2013 Posted 1 November, 2013 @BBCBreaking: BBC broadcaster Paul Gambaccini has been arrested on suspicion of historical sexual offences http://t.co/PA4k8JSf2a That must be Hatch's 64 year old then. This investigation is unreal, it seems that everyone from way back then was at it although many of those named I wouldn't have suspected. Some off the likely candidates (in my eyes) have not been pulled and I reckon they'll be a few more big names before this investigation is over.
egg Posted 1 November, 2013 Posted 1 November, 2013 It's getting rather tiresome all these people who wait 30 years and then accuse someone of touching their ass or something. I can understand a child being afraid to report something but these people have been adults a long time now yet chose to keep quiet and let these "abusers" supposedly carry on and do the same to other people (if they are guilty). Has more than a wiff of compo about it. But you don't know if it was raised years ago. These things were dismissed back then. That said, I do wander if it's really in the public interests to prosecute 30 years or whatever down the line.
gaz Posted 1 November, 2013 Posted 1 November, 2013 With it being so widespread, I'm surprised there hasn't been many (any?) film stars or comedians mentioned (Jim Davidson/Freddie Starr aside).
Viking Warrior Posted 1 November, 2013 Posted 1 November, 2013 None of those brought have nothing to do with the main strand of the Saville investigation . Indeed has anyone been directly arrested in relation to Saville .? Even the driver who topped himself was only classed as being third strand not connected with Saville I can understand people being scared if Saville judging by his alleged threats but all these others are unconnected to Saville . So all these people could have come forward sooner . Janice long kissed me on the cheek once can I claim that as sexual abuse ? It was peck her back as a thank you . It was a welcoming peck
Hatch Posted 2 November, 2013 Posted 2 November, 2013 With it being so widespread, I'm surprised there hasn't been many (any?) film stars or comedians mentioned (Jim Davidson/Freddie Starr aside). or Rock and pop stars, surely they would have been the most 'rampant'
gaz Posted 2 November, 2013 Posted 2 November, 2013 Maybe they have more money (or contacts) to keep things suppressed.
badgerx16 Posted 15 November, 2013 Posted 15 November, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-24955436 Folk singer Roy Harper has been charged with sexually abusing a girl from the age of 12. And so it goes on........
Lord Duckhunter Posted 16 November, 2013 Posted 16 November, 2013 or Rock and pop stars, surely they would have been the most 'rampant' I have a mate who works for the gutter press, he claims that they are only taking forward cases where the perpetrator was sexually attracted to the victim because they were under age. They have had a lot of victims coming forward saying "such and such gave me one and I was only 14,15 ECT" , but they are not taking these forward because they were not attracted to them on the basis of their age , and it would be hard to prove they didn't think they were old enough. The ones they're after are the ones that damn well knew they were underage and that was the attraction. Don't know if its true, but it makes sense of the lack of certain rock stars.
View From The Top Posted 16 November, 2013 Posted 16 November, 2013 I have a mate who works for the gutter press, he claims that they are only taking forward cases where the perpetrator was sexually attracted to the victim because they were under age. They have had a lot of victims coming forward saying "such and such gave me one and I was only 14,15 ECT" , but they are not taking these forward because they were not attracted to them on the basis of their age , and it would be hard to prove they didn't think they were old enough. The ones they're after are the ones that damn well knew they were underage and that was the attraction. Don't know if its true, but it makes sense of the lack of certain rock stars. That's a very interesting theory and would make sense.
View From The Top Posted 16 November, 2013 Posted 16 November, 2013 I have a mate who works for the gutter press, he claims that they are only taking forward cases where the perpetrator was sexually attracted to the victim because they were under age. They have had a lot of victims coming forward saying "such and such gave me one and I was only 14,15 ECT" , but they are not taking these forward because they were not attracted to them on the basis of their age , and it would be hard to prove they didn't think they were old enough. The ones they're after are the ones that damn well knew they were underage and that was the attraction. Don't know if its true, but it makes sense of the lack of certain rock stars. That's a very interesting theory and would make sense.
Grey Crab Posted 16 November, 2013 Posted 16 November, 2013 Whenever they talk of 'historical sexual offences', I just assume that they were caught in the plot to murder Edward II by penetrating his anus with a red hot poker.
Grey Crab Posted 16 November, 2013 Posted 16 November, 2013 It's getting rather tiresome all these people who wait 30 years and then accuse someone of touching their ass or something. I can understand a child being afraid to report something but these people have been adults a long time now yet chose to keep quiet and let these "abusers" supposedly carry on and do the same to other people (if they are guilty). Has more than a wiff of compo about it. *****.
Manuel Posted 16 November, 2013 Posted 16 November, 2013 Probably that woman with the wrinkly stockings. Ew!
Jonnyboy Posted 17 November, 2013 Posted 17 November, 2013 Wasn't Mandy Smith like 13 years old or summat?
trousers Posted 22 December, 2013 Posted 22 December, 2013 TheSunBreakingNews @TheSunBreaking EXCLUSIVE: Rolf Harris charged with three more indecent assaults against girls aged seven to 19
Jonnyboy Posted 23 December, 2013 Posted 23 December, 2013 Wasn't Mandy Smith like 13 years old or summat? OK I just Wikipediad her. Why hasnt Bill Wyman been arrested?
BlakeySFC Posted 23 December, 2013 Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) Some of the replies in this thread are downright worrying, I knew there were a few nutters on this forum but can't believe there's some that can try to defend/deny proven paedophiles. Edited 23 December, 2013 by BlakeySFC
hypochondriac Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 Some of the replies in this thread are downright worrying, I knew there were a few nutters on this forum but can't believe there's some that can try to defend/deny proven paedophiles. I think the point was that it was not proven at the time and there should always be a due process before deciding that someone is guilty. Don't think anyone has defended Saville since the amount of evidence came to light.
Jonnyboy Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 I think the point was that it was not proven at the time and there should always be a due process before deciding that someone is guilty. Don't think anyone has defended Saville since the amount of evidence came to light. #backtracking
hypochondriac Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 #backtracking Nope. I would have acted exactly the same.
Viking Warrior Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 Blakey Some of the replies in this thread are downright worrying, I knew there were a few nutters on this forum but can't believe there's some that can try to defend/deny proven paedophiles. your post can be taken two ways, Just because someone has been charged dosent necessary mean they are guilty. We now live in a society where people can make alsorts of allegations against people decades ago. but let the courts decided and those who have been charged prove or disprove the allegations How can you put a charge to a celebrity that either in 1963 or 1964 you sexually assorted XYZ . Im not going to mock the seriousness of this case but its like spread betting covering all your options, As for the Police i think they are making up for errors in the past re the likes of Saville and the recent events in Rochdale Its is not about defending people its about letting the courts of the land decide. nothing more and nothing less
pap Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 OK I just Wikipediad her. Why hasnt Bill Wyman been arrested? It's an interesting case. The mother apparently gave consent for Wyman to see her pre-16, they always claimed that there was no underage sex going on, although Mandy Smith did later claim that she'd slept with Wyman at the age of 14. No idea why Wyman hasn't been arrested. Guessing that given that it was all out in the open, someone somewhere decided a prosecution wasn't in the public interest. Very seedy business, all told.
View From The Top Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 It's an interesting case. The mother apparently gave consent for Wyman to see her pre-16, they always claimed that there was no underage sex going on, although Mandy Smith did later claim that she'd slept with Wyman at the age of 14. No idea why Wyman hasn't been arrested. Guessing that given that it was all out in the open, someone somewhere decided a prosecution wasn't in the public interest. Very seedy business, all told. I remember it as the mother as good as pimping the child out.
andysstuff Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 It's an interesting case. The mother apparently gave consent for Wyman to see her pre-16, they always claimed that there was no underage sex going on, although Mandy Smith did later claim that she'd slept with Wyman at the age of 14. No idea why Wyman hasn't been arrested. Guessing that given that it was all out in the open, someone somewhere decided a prosecution wasn't in the public interest. Very seedy business, all told. I'm not sure parental consent is an adequate defence............
pap Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 I remember it as the mother as good as pimping the child out. That's certainly not the first time I've heard that interpretation offered.
pap Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 I'm not sure parental consent is an adequate defence............ Nope, it's not. They could go after Wyman on Smith's later claims alone. I'm sure she'd have a case with some corroboration. The difference between Wyman and a lot of the other cases is that no-one is making a complaint. I'm not saying that it excuses the behaviour, but it might go some way to explaining why the OB aren't prosecuting a case, when they are prosecuting cases where complaints have been brought. The CPS would have to justify any prosecution of Wyman as being in the public interest. Of course, none of that precludes money changing hands or influence being exerted in other areas.
Badger Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 Just found this interview with Johnny Lydon ( when of course he was still Johnny Rotten) talking about Jimmy Savile in 1978 0:50 seconds in he's a hypocrite...I know some rumours etc .."
Halo Stickman Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 I remember it as the mother as good as pimping the child out. If a mother consents to a 45 year-old man having sex with her 14 year-old daughter, surely that mother is guilty of an offence herself? I suppose proving it is the problem.
andysstuff Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 If a mother consents to a 45 year-old man having sex with her 14 year-old daughter, surely that mother is guilty of an offence herself? I suppose proving it is the problem. I guess so. Other than the age gap there's no differnce between this and Ian Watkins though.
buctootim Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 I guess so. Other than the age gap there's no differnce between this and Ian Watkins though. There's 25 years difference in social attitudes as well. Public opinion has shifted from finding it 'creepy' to wanting long prison sentences.
Lord Duckhunter Posted 24 December, 2013 Posted 24 December, 2013 It's an interesting case. The mother apparently gave consent for Wyman to see her pre-16, they always claimed that there was no underage sex going on, although Mandy Smith did later claim that she'd slept with Wyman at the age of 14. No idea why Wyman hasn't been arrested. Guessing that given that it was all out in the open, someone somewhere decided a prosecution wasn't in the public interest. Very seedy business, all told. As I posted a few pages ago my Journo mate reckons they're concentrating on stars that were attracted to youngsters because they were young. That's why there has not been loads of rock stars prosecuted. If you read Bill Graham's book about promoting The Stones,The Who, Grateful Dead, Led Zep ect ect, they certainly did not ask for any form of id. I guess in the Wyman case, he was attracted to Mandy Smith because she was fit. He was not attracted to young girls as a matter of course. And for clarity, this is not an excuse, the guy should face questioning IMO. I'm just passing on something I was told by a member of the gutter press. They may well come back and get him later, or one of the others, but they're after the ones who targeted young girls solely on the basis of their age.
Viking Warrior Posted 14 January, 2014 Posted 14 January, 2014 I see that Dave Lee Travis and Bill Roache Trials have commended to day In the DLT cases the charges relate to a single sexual assualt some time in a 2 or 3 year period and not a specific date im not making judgement , but sureley with these events going back 4 or five decades its going to be hard to prove or disprove either way However Against DLT a claim is made that an indecent assault on a woman between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2003 A sexual assault on a woman between 1 June 2008 and 30 November 2008 These two are relatively recent especially the 2008 allegation. surely in these two casesyou would know exactly what date it occurred ? not some time in a 6 month period unless it was on more than one occassion. Because of the severity of the assault a woman is unlikey never forget the time she was subjected to such evil doings. You cannot spread bet such accusations or can you ?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now