Jump to content
IGNORED

Stuart Hall / Max Clifford


Maesknoll Red

Recommended Posts

We all know what is wrong...... but everyone is guilty as soon as, as far as the public is concerned..... fan the flames and nobody stands a fair chance?

I'd expect there are a fair few on here that might question their own actions over the years?

And I mean that either way............ something else....... all of this ain't going to make it all go away or make it right until the human race ends.

Thing is the grey areas if there is such a thing?

Older guys who know exactly what they are doing and then taking advantage of young, impressionable often vulnerable girls is very wrong in my book. It is not the same as an 18 year old going out with a 15 year old. These guys are alleged to have used their power, wealth and fame to take advantage of underage girls end of. They had their fun now they must face the consequences - if of course they are found guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These names are not being pulled out of a hat, some will be supported allegations i.e. at least 2 unconnected people making similar claims, but I also suspect that perhaps the old bill may have given somebody immunity from further prosecution for information, possibly somebody who has already done a stretch and dosen't want to do another, just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the allegations against M Clifford involve children. The ones against DLT don't. These are women in their 50s who, after the Savile publicity, decided to contact the police and say "so-and-so groped me in 1977 and I've left it 35 years to complain" - and the probably "please give me the name of a solicitor who specialises in compensation claims".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the allegations against M Clifford involve children. The ones against DLT don't. These are women in their 50s who, after the Savile publicity, decided to contact the police and say "so-and-so groped me in 1977 and I've left it 35 years to complain" - and the probably "please give me the name of a solicitor who specialises in compensation claims".

i'm sure you may well be correct in all you say, but the counter argument might well be what chance would one person have stood when the offence took place, but times have changed and I cannot believe that police or CPS would ever charge on the evidence of just one claimant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm sure you may well be correct in all you say, but the counter argument might well be what chance would one person have stood when the offence took place, but times have changed and I cannot believe that police or CPS would ever charge on the evidence of just one claimant.

Well, Stuart Hall is the only person charged so far over what is what is likely to have been corroborated evidence. We'll wait and see whether the evidence against any other celebs is even considered good enough to submit a file to the CPS. If it isn't, watch out the Met Police commander leading the criminal investigation...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These names are not being pulled out of a hat, some will be supported allegations i.e. at least 2 unconnected people making similar claims, but I also suspect that perhaps the old bill may have given somebody immunity from further prosecution for information, possibly somebody who has already done a stretch and dosen't want to do another, just a thought.

IMO.....this is all to do with certain newspaper tycoon who was made to look a clown in front of everyone by our goverment

Now flexing his muscles in - Start with a dead celeb and let those in real power see what real damage I can do if they dont back off

I love conspiracy theories me....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO.....this is all to do with certain newspaper tycoon who was made to look a clown in front of everyone by our goverment

Now flexing his muscles in - Start with a dead celeb and let those in real power see what real damage I can do if they dont back off

I love conspiracy theories me....

Well that's what happened with the MP expense scandal that saw several MPs jailed.

The Barclay brothers own the Telegraph and also control the small channel island of Sark. Despite the brothers' strenuous objection the government pushed through laws that significantly reduced their control over Sark. Result was that the Telegraph started publishing all of the dirt on the MPs.

I expect that the press are significantly motivated on this one as they can show how effective a free press can be despite Leveson's attempt to shackle it. And I bet they would love to nail a live senior politician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the allegations against M Clifford involve children. The ones against DLT don't. These are women in their 50s who, after the Savile publicity, decided to contact the police and say "so-and-so groped me in 1977 and I've left it 35 years to complain" - and the probably "please give me the name of a solicitor who specialises in compensation claims".

I don't think it's quite that cynical. I would suggest that it's women in their 50s who are dissatisfied with their lives and want someone to blame. Whether they genuinely believe that their lives were wrecked by being groped 35 years ago by a celebrity is a matter on which one can only speculate.

Just as racists blame blacks for all their misfortunes, feminists blame men - or am I being cynical now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's quite that cynical. I would suggest that it's women in their 50s who are dissatisfied with their lives and want someone to blame. Whether they genuinely believe that their lives were wrecked by being groped 35 years ago by a celebrity is a matter on which one can only speculate.

Just as racists blame blacks for all their misfortunes, feminists blame men - or am I being cynical now?

I guess we won't really know unless these cases get to court, Aizoon. As I've said, I'm pretty sceptical many of them actually will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think? No, I'm asking the question as to whether the police are going to pursue all the alleged cases of people having sexual contact with under-16-year-olds. The knowledge of the behaviour of, for instance, certain notable rock bands, has been out there for many years, but I don't recall any arrests being made. It strikes me that they're picking off easy targets at the moment, particularly people who are dead. I just wonder if they'd have the guts to address one or two cases that might be a little more challenging...

Call me a pervert, but actually yes I do see a difference between, for instance, an 18-year-old having a relationship with a 15-year-old, and a dirty old man assaulting a child, although I don't think the law makes much distinction...

problem is comman sense doesn't come in to it its letter of the law, a 16 year old boy having relations with a girl and caught then that 16 yo boy will end up having to sign the sex offenders register, its the way the country has gone with the blame culture and sue culture,

Now I'm not defending everything but there are two sides to every story and people no matter how much i dislike them are innocent until proven guilty, no matter how damaging the charge is,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, I bet there was a queue a mile long of people wanting to stab Clifford in the back, but as someone said, he must know stuff that would make your ears bleed

Keep it up, boys, this is the only way I can stay in touch out here in the land of sand

I think the phrase is 'knows where the bodies are buried'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mr Edmonds,

Leave £10,000 in a bin near the White Hart in Bitton or I'll tell the police you tossed me off on Swap Shop in the seventies.

Whoo hoo! I've just found £10,000 in a bin near the White Hart in Bitton.

You'll have to write another note to someone else.... and next time be there when the money's dropped in the bin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me a pervert, but actually yes I do see a difference between, for instance, an 18-year-old having a relationship with a 15-year-old, and a dirty old man assaulting a child, although I don't think the law makes much distinction...

The law is supposed to take into account the age difference. An old man assaulting a child should carry a heavier sentence than youths of similar age having sex. Whose law is it anyway? Often the News of the World used to report on top Toff judges having sex with underage girls - part of the reason that the News of the World was shut down? One wouldn't want to question the integrity of our hopelessly corrupt and class based legal system and its anti English working man culture would one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law is supposed to take into account the age difference. An old man assaulting a child should carry a heavier sentence than youths of similar age having sex. Whose law is it anyway? Often the News of the World used to report on top Toff judges having sex with underage girls - part of the reason that the News of the World was shut down? One wouldn't want to question the integrity of our hopelessly corrupt and class based legal system and its anti English working man culture would one?

Equally, one wouldn't want to let the facts ever get in the way of a good old conspiracy theory, would one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...