Cranfield Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 Some posts have been removed. Don't post speculative comments naming people that you think could/should be accused of these crimes. Even if its meant as a joke, it is a dangerous thing to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 Stuart Hall aside - there are a number of high profile arrests, normally with the full glare of press / publicity. People are arrested at the airport, houses searched - police emerging with bags of "evidence" - 30 years after the event. I will be a little more convinced when they start appearing in court and convicted - if guilty. Stuart Hall has been already. When will Garry Glitter, Rolf Harris, Freddie Starr, Jimmy Tarbuck, Dave Lee Travis, Max Clifford etc. get their day in court? The first one already has and was convicted - twice! So has Jonathan King, Chris Denning and there have been more. I really don't see why people are complaining about this or why people are suggesting that this is some sort of misguided witch hunt. If someone has been sexually abused then why should there not be a proper investigation? J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 Gary Glitter served time for other offences, but he was the first one pulled in by this enquiry. Not heard anything since. He served time for child abuse offences. So what if he hasn't been charged yet in relation to the latest investigation? I don't see what point you are making here. Are you intimating that its all probably set up? J. Has there actually been any proper evidence against these people or just trial by common accusation? Presumably there has been given that Stuart Hall felt the need to plead guilty. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 Tarbie has been charged and bailed - SH has admitted, DLT strenuously denies after 2 interviews. I just hope that those who are lying get proper justice and i dont just mean those accused but not charged. The accusers, if false, should be harshly dealt with. I am with those who have asked when will it all end, as anyone of that era appears to be open to allegations. I havent suffered abuse and feel strongly for those who have that their pain should be ended. Is there an attempt to implicate innocent people just because they have money ? I very much hope not. He hasn't been charged according to the reports. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10040575/Jimmy-Tarbuck-arrested-over-historic-sex-abuse-allegations.html J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 Lighten up its a joke It's a joke on a public forum in a discussion about child sex abuse. It's pretty distasteful. And, yet again, it's something which isn't too flattering of shooters. Shooters seem to be good at that. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 the xmas panto should be a cracker if that lot end up in the same nick mikky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 (edited) Stuart Hall has been already. Jonathan - before you dive in the next time - take the trouble to read my post. I was making the point that Stuart Hall has already made a guilty plea and been to court - the rest haven't - in this current round - before you start prattling on about Gary Glitter and Jonathan King. They preceded the recent arrests. If the point you are making is that Gary Glitter has form for this - so he must be arrested and that is okay. Although it would be a stupid statement - feel free to make it. I don't care how many time Gary Glitter has been done - what I am saying is that he was questioned rather rapidly, but nothing since. I also pointed out that Tarbuck hasn't been charged - way before you felt the need to repeat that. I really don't see why people are complaining about this or why people are suggesting that this is some sort of misguided witch hunt. If someone has been sexually abused then why should there not be a proper investigation? As for that little gem - I am not complaining, but I suspect Max Clifford et al will complain if charges are never brought. Edited May 7, 2013 by Gordon R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
castletyne Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 It's a joke on a public forum in a discussion about child sex abuse. It's pretty distasteful. And, yet again, it's something which isn't too flattering of shooters. Shooters seem to be good at that. J. Why are some paranoid to think anything said on this forum will affect anyones view on shooting Yes its distastefull like many jokes are Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 7, 2013 Report Share Posted May 7, 2013 (edited) And, yet again, it's something which isn't too flattering of shooters. Shooters seem to be good at that. Jonathan - you are given to making rash generalisations about shooters. Are you a shooter and part of that tendency? Or are you just slagging off the rest of us? Either way - it doesn't reflect well on a "shooter". Edited May 7, 2013 by Gordon R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushkin Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 It is getting a bit irritating Jonathan. You seem to think you have the sanctimonious right to decide what all posters can or cannot have the right to say about this (or any other topic) and that we should all just fall in with your way of thinking. I'm not saying you do not have some reasons for remorse as to what has happened to any victim but please - you are not the Sheriff of Dodge city. I'm sure the majority of posters on this site can and do make their own minds up as to what or how they want to post on it. Please - unless you are now a new moderator; you do not need to act as the consciousness of board members. Oh and by the way - what do you have against shooters? Pushkin B) TROLLS live in many diverse places and behind many diverse facades Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodo123 Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 How can they reasonably prove any of these cases unless the guilty admit or if their are bags of witnesses? If their are bags of witnesses then why didn't the witnesses report it? I'm all for those guilty getting punished but what evidence is left? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitey10765666 Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 well they are adamant that the lie detector is 99.9% fool proof so why not use that on both accused and accuser, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVB Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 I have lived with somebody who was abused by a member of the Catholic clergy between the age of 8 and 15. They kept this secret until the age of 38. Why? Because of the belief that it was their fault and the shame it would bring. When this did come out it nearly destroyed this person. Suicide was a very distinct possibility and it spilt their family up. 10 years on there is no reconciliation. So she should have been ‘brave’ and come out with this information at the time? Or is she lying because she didn’t? If anybody thinks the later then two words. **** off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 Well said. IMO not someting to joke about. I have lived with somebody who was abused by a member of the Catholic clergy between the age of 8 and 15. They kept this secret until the age of 38. Why? Because of the belief that it was their fault and the shame it would bring. When this did come out it nearly destroyed this person. Suicide was a very distinct possibility and it spilt their family up. 10 years on there is no reconciliation. So she should have been ‘brave’ and come out with this information at the time? Or is she lying because she didn’t? If anybody thinks the later then two words. **** off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 How can a single complaint from nearly 50 years ago be investigated? SH was trapped by having a pattern of behaviour but if all they can trawl up against a person is one complaint in all that time it doesn't look very convincing to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 (edited) Tarbuck hasn't been charged. Bailed pending further enquiries. I would rather he hadnt but I'm simply quoting SKY News - if he hasnt been arrested, how has he been released on bail? This just from MSN A spokesman for the police force said: "North Yorkshire Police can confirm that a 73-year-old man has been arrested in connection with a historic child sex abuse investigation in Harrogate. "The man was arrested in Kingston upon Thames on Friday 26 April 2013. "Following questioning, he was released on police bail pending further inquiries. "The complaint relates to an incident that occurred in the late 1970s when the victim was a young boy." I think its a case of check your facts before you state something which is obviously wrong GordonR - but I forgive you. Edited May 8, 2013 by Kes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 Kes - no forgiveness needed, as you are wrong. He hasn't been charged. Bailing suspects after an interview under caution is relatively common. They are bailed to return at a later date, when they are either interviewed again, charged with the offence or released from bail. I do not need to check my facts, but I forgive you too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 Kes - no forgiveness needed, as you are wrong. He hasn't been charged. Bailing suspects after an interview under caution is relatively common. They are bailed to return at a later date, when they are either interviewed again, charged with the offence or released from bail. I do not need to check my facts, but I forgive you too. Gordon, hard as it is to admit this - you may well be right, even though my comment was a quote about being 'charged'. Arrested yes, bailed yes but perhaps not charged after checking a number of sources. So .......my apologies, the source I quoted (and I therefore) is/am wrong, I may forgive you for being right but not for a while !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 Kes - no problem. :good: If he has done it, I hope he gets justice, but I would be genuinely shocked. I know they don't go around with a child molester badge on - so you can only judge on their public persona, but he seems a genuine bloke. Jimmy Saville always gave me the creeps, as did Jonathan King and Gary Glitter, but the rest came as a surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swiss.tony Posted May 8, 2013 Report Share Posted May 8, 2013 Jimmy Saville has proper caused some trouble here i bet he"s laughing like a trooper up there all the rest off them were just copying him he"s the daddy im so glad he never answered my letter i sent him when i was 10 year old it could have scard me for life Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.