skintsaint Posted 13 February, 2014 Share Posted 13 February, 2014 \honest, he prob jiggled my boobs or something. For the w@nkbank... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 13 February, 2014 Share Posted 13 February, 2014 so the jury can get a unanimous decisicion so they can now go for the split decision. wheres the fairness in that Your either guilty or not guilty. I see the jury is not a 5o -50 split on gender, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 13 February, 2014 Share Posted 13 February, 2014 so the jury can get a unanimous decisicion so they can now go for the split decision. wheres the fairness in that Your either guilty or not guilty. I see the jury is not a 5o -50 split on gender, Do you have any idea how the justice system works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 14 February, 2014 Share Posted 14 February, 2014 Do you have any idea how the justice system works? I think everyone is learning. I found out about a third verdict yesterday that I was previously unaware of. Jury nullification. Defendant found guilty but jury acquits anyway. Happened to Clive Ponting, who leaked documents concerning the sinking of the Belgrano to the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 14 February, 2014 Share Posted 14 February, 2014 Hypo, I have a broad understanding of the justice system but dont hace a ck=lue about the final workings of the justice system and I wrote my comment before I knew the outcome of the DLt verdict. up here we have differnt terms , admonished and not proven. Now what does not proven mean guilty or not guilty. depends which advocate you have defending or prosecutiong you Time for an electronic fag, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 February, 2014 Share Posted 14 February, 2014 Hypo, I have a broad understanding of the justice system but dont hace a ck=lue about the final workings of the justice system and I wrote my comment before I knew the outcome of the DLt verdict. up here we have differnt terms , admonished and not proven. Now what does not proven mean guilty or not guilty. depends which advocate you have defending or prosecutiong you Time for an electronic fag, 'Not proven' is a verdict that is only possible in Scotland. In England you're either guilty or you're not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 14 February, 2014 Share Posted 14 February, 2014 thanks for that whitley I was referring to scotland thats where I live. Like you your either guilty or not guilty. but hopefully the double jeopardy laws up hill will diasappear of the statutes and some serious criminals can be convicted instead of getting off on a technicality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohio Saint Posted 14 February, 2014 Share Posted 14 February, 2014 I'm out of the loop a bit here, being overseas and all. I'm also too lazy to read the whole thread or do the research. Can anyone give a list af all the proven paedos and miscreants here please to keep me up to date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 14 February, 2014 Share Posted 14 February, 2014 Can anyone give a list af all the proven paedos and miscreants here please to keep me up to date? You mean paedos and miscreants on this on this thread, or on Saintsweb generally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 April, 2014 Share Posted 12 April, 2014 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2602802/How-Liberal-party-police-MI5-concealed-MP-Cyril-Smiths-industrial-scale-child-abuse.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 12 April, 2014 Share Posted 12 April, 2014 Funny how it's only the dead that are getting exposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sussexsaint Posted 13 April, 2014 Share Posted 13 April, 2014 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2602802/How-Liberal-party-police-MI5-concealed-MP-Cyril-Smiths-industrial-scale-child-abuse.html FFS , sick ***t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 13 April, 2014 Share Posted 13 April, 2014 This story was going around a couple of years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 13 April, 2014 Share Posted 13 April, 2014 Funny how it's only the dead that are getting exposed. And not any living former Home Secretary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 13 April, 2014 Share Posted 13 April, 2014 Can someone please explain to me why the police, bbc, politicians... any other body would protect these people? I accept these things happened but why the hell were they protected? I just don't understand. Most coppers would give you a parking ticket for parking on your own drive, so what was "In it" for the establishment to protect these people. Am I being really thick.....I just don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 13 April, 2014 Share Posted 13 April, 2014 Can someone please explain to me why the police, bbc, politicians... any other body would protect these people? I accept these things happened but why the hell were they protected? I just don't understand. Most coppers would give you a parking ticket for parking on your own drive, so what was "In it" for the establishment to protect these people. Am I being really thick.....I just don't get it. Especially for a complete non entity like Cyril Smith. Pretty sickening stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 13 April, 2014 Share Posted 13 April, 2014 Can someone please explain to me why the police, bbc, politicians... any other body would protect these people? I accept these things happened but why the hell were they protected? I just don't understand. Most coppers would give you a parking ticket for parking on your own drive, so what was "In it" for the establishment to protect these people. Am I being really thick.....I just don't get it. Leverage is more important and a lot cleaner than a criminal conviction. One person who comes out of this episode with no credit is Esther Rantzen. The founder of Childline, a national child protection charity, appears on TV after Savile's death and bashfully admits that everyone, including her, knew what was going on at the time. Incredible. Why didn't Rantzen grass Savile up? Some would suggest self-interest, others have gone as far as suggesting that Childline was a front organisation with a side-aim of protecting high-profile paedos. Personally, I think she knows it wasn't just Savile, and that going after him would make no long-term difference. People in positions of influence have been building these sort of networks for years, and using them to gain the whip hand when keeping people in line. Ted Heath is credited with introducing a dirt book. I'm sure I've linked this before, but this is a good read. http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/2013/05/11/the-dirt-book-how-the-sexual-abuse-of-children-is-used-for-political-gain/ In short Gemmel, some of the people running the country don't really think like the rest of us, and haven't done for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 13 April, 2014 Share Posted 13 April, 2014 Especially for a complete non entity like Cyril Smith. Pretty sickening stuff. It was hot on the heels of the Jeremy Thorpe case , to have allegations like this over another senior liberal would have been disastrous for them. Bearing in mind they only had a handful of seats at the time, it would probably have finished them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 14 April, 2014 Share Posted 14 April, 2014 It was hot on the heels of the Jeremy Thorpe case , to have allegations like this over another senior liberal would have been disastrous for them. Bearing in mind they only had a handful of seats at the time, it would probably have finished them off. The speed with which that William Hague story got buried was a wonder to behold, what was it, a couple of days in the papers? then nothing. They can usually kill a story if they really want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 14 April, 2014 Share Posted 14 April, 2014 The speed with which that William Hague story got buried was a wonder to behold, what was it, a couple of days in the papers? then nothing. They can usually kill a story if they really want to. Must have missed that one. Fancy giving a precís? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 14 April, 2014 Share Posted 14 April, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 14 April, 2014 Share Posted 14 April, 2014 Must have missed that one. Fancy giving a precís? It wasn't a peado thing, he booked to share a hotel room with a male aide. My mate in the press told me years ago Hague batted for the other side ( I actually posted it on a saints web 2010 election before this story broke). Said that his marriage was politically motivated , and that the rumours he'd heard ( but could not publish due to a certain thing called libel) were of a " relationship" between Hague and a famous ex Olympic runner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 14 April, 2014 Share Posted 14 April, 2014 It wasn't a peado thing, he booked to share a hotel room with a male aide. My mate in the press told me years ago Hague batted for the other side ( I actually posted it on a saints web 2010 election before this story broke). Said that his marriage was politically motivated , and that the rumours he'd heard ( but could not publish due to a certain thing called libel) were of a " relationship" between Hague and a famous ex Olympic runner. Oddly enough Lord D, did a spot of research into this myself. Hague was heading up the North Wales child abuse inquiry and allegedly stifled claims that led away from North Wales. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9663457/William-Hague-stifled-1996-paedophile-report-says-victim.html http://21stcenturywire.com/2012/10/29/what-did-hague-know-former-minister-says-thatcher-aide-was-paedophile-who-preyed-on-boys-home/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chocco boxo Posted 15 April, 2014 Share Posted 15 April, 2014 Did not that fat **** Cyril Smith used to appear on That's Life quite a bit? Esther ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindsorSaint Posted 28 April, 2014 Share Posted 28 April, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27192600 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 28 April, 2014 Share Posted 28 April, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27192600 Shame they went for him first. I'm sure he knows f**kloads on all the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudders Posted 28 April, 2014 Share Posted 28 April, 2014 Shame they went for him first. I'm sure he knows f**kloads on all the others. Maybe he'd spill the beans for a reduced sentence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 28 April, 2014 Share Posted 28 April, 2014 Maybe he'd spill the beans for a reduced sentence? More a likely a rare exception to the "no shoelaces" rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 28 April, 2014 Share Posted 28 April, 2014 Maybe he'd spill the beans for a reduced sentence? Plus one bletch points for double meaning/pun whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 30 April, 2014 Share Posted 30 April, 2014 Blair cabinet minister named as paedophile. Accusations of a cover-up at the time. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pressure-mounts-tony-blair-answer-3475758 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 1 May, 2014 Share Posted 1 May, 2014 I wonder what else they've got over Clifford that he doesn't reveal all he knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint in Paradise Posted 3 May, 2014 Share Posted 3 May, 2014 The Judge in the M Clifford case explains things:- http://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-max-clifford Summary SENTENCING REMARKS 1. You have been convicted of eight offences of indecent assault. These offences may have taken place a long time ago when inappropriate and trivial sexual misbehaviour was more likely to be tolerated or overlooked, but your offending is not trivial but of a very serious nature and any perception to the contrary on your part is misconceived. There are another 63 paragraphs to read hence why I have only posted the link not the whole lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaz Posted 3 May, 2014 Share Posted 3 May, 2014 Anyone else find it slightly strange that no musicians or sports stars have been linked or arrested with any sort of historical accusations? Surely they'd have an equal opportunities as those convicted so far (especially musicians with the fans), I can think of a few sports personalities who would have had younger admirers' attentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 3 May, 2014 Share Posted 3 May, 2014 Anyone else find it slightly strange that no musicians or sports stars have been linked or arrested with any sort of historical accusations? Surely they'd have an equal opportunities as those convicted so far (especially musicians with the fans), I can think of a few sports personalities who would have had younger admirers' attentions. It's more "consenting" I'd imagine. Most slappers or groupies are proud to have bedded a rock star or a footballer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 f^cking hell, just F^cking hell. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28034427 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 Just when you think that nothing else could shock you..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 f^cking hell, just F^cking hell. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28034427 He assaulted patients in bed, and claimed to have abused corpses, reviews into his conduct on NHS premises found. Well he's not claiming that now and clearly the corpses aren't coming forward so yet again this means a third party(ies) was aware of what was going on and chose to keep it to themselves until now. WTF is the matter with these people? In my eyes anyone who helped to cover up such behaviour is just as guilty as the one carrying it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 Fair points wursel . Very disgusting if he abused dead bodies .thats pretty evil and is at the serious end of depravity . As for using dead people glass eyes as rings . I'm not sure what to think on that as there is no corroborated evidence What I can't understand is . Why has no one else be bought to account unless like Saville they are no longer alive . But I don't get that impression that's the case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysstuff Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 This isn't the first time there have been allegations of necrophilia with him. He stayed at home with his mum's corpse for two or three days before he reported the death is memory serves me correctly. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 This isn't the first time there have been allegations of necrophilia with him. He stayed at home with his mum's corpse for two or three days before he reported the death is memory serves me correctly. The thought he may have done that to his mum Andy is just too sickening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohio Saint Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 [quote=Viking Warrior;1973903 The thought he may have done that to his mum Andy is just too sickening Having a mum called Andy is a bit weird too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 Perhaps she was dying for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysstuff Posted 26 June, 2014 Share Posted 26 June, 2014 Or gagging for it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 June, 2014 Share Posted 30 June, 2014 BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking Veteran entertainer Rolf Harris has been found guilty of all indecent assault charges http://bbc.in/1vnOawx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 30 June, 2014 Share Posted 30 June, 2014 Fair points wursel . Very disgusting if he abused dead bodies .thats pretty evil and is at the serious end of depravity . As for using dead people glass eyes as rings . I'm not sure what to think on that as there is no corroborated evidence What I can't understand is . Why has no one else be bought to account unless like Saville they are no longer alive . But I don't get that impression that's the case Some pictures were published of him wearing a ring with a glass eye on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Posted 30 June, 2014 Share Posted 30 June, 2014 BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking Veteran entertainer Rolf Harris has been found guilty of all indecent assault charges http://bbc.in/1vnOawx Nooooo Of all the names that have cropped up was really hoping it wouldn't be true about Rolf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Crab Posted 30 June, 2014 Share Posted 30 June, 2014 @rustyrockets: "Can you tell what it is yet?" Yes Rolf, it's indecent assault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 30 June, 2014 Share Posted 30 June, 2014 Sounds like the jury was convinced that Rolf did it. It's good that the victims will be getting some recognition of the harm done to them, and hopefully some closure. I would like to see Operation Yewtree go after more challenging and significant targets, maybe unlift those D-Notices that Blair put on Operation Ore. http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 30 June, 2014 Share Posted 30 June, 2014 I would like to see Operation Yewtree go after more challenging and significant targets, maybe unlift those D-Notices that Blair put on Operation Ore. http://www.tpuc.org/blair-covering-up-paedophile-scandal/ You know D notices haven't existed since 1993 and are now called DA notices? You also know DA notices (Defence Advisory notices) are not 'put on' any particular action but are voluntary guidance issued on five general themes of national security - DA-Notice 01: Military Operations, Plans & Capabilities DA-Notice 02: Nuclear & Non-Nuclear Weapons & Equipment DA-Notice 03: Ciphers & Secure Communications DA-Notice 04: Sensitive Installations & Home Addresses DA-Notice 05: United Kingdom Security & Intelligence Services & Special Services You also know that Ore falls outside the scope of DA notices, Blair never put any D notices on Ore, had no power to do so and even if he had then, because the code is voluntary and in any event the media make up the majority of the Defence Advisory committee and they are free to ignore it? What drives you to write this crap Pap? bull**** or ignorance? for everybody else here is the link to DA Committee website and here is the link to Tom Watson MP's thoughts on the matter. tom Watson raised the issues associated with Ore in the House of commons. http://www.dnotice.org.uk/index.htm http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2013/01/comprehensive-answer-on-the-use-of-d-notices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 30 June, 2014 Share Posted 30 June, 2014 Same jury that reckoned Brooks knew nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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