Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Sun Jul 06, 2014 9:08 pm  

Is Bill Wyman going to jail, or is he too big?

Do people want Bill Wyman to go to jail?

Is the level of evidence at the trials of Harris and Clifford going to be enough for all the allegations against politicians, or will politicians demand some proof to convict one of theirs?

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Sun Jul 06, 2014 9:16 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Is Bill Wyman going to jail, or is he too big?

Do people want Bill Wyman to go to jail?

Is the level of evidence at the trials of Harris and Clifford going to be enough for all the allegations against politicians, or will politicians demand some proof to convict one of theirs?

What has bill Wyman got to do with the Rolf Harris case? honestly, reading your posts on this subject you seem a tad delusional.

I'll ask you one question, do you think Rolf Harris sexually abused the people in question?

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Sun Jul 06, 2014 10:20 pm  

christopher wrote:

What has bill Wyman got to do with the Rolf Harris case? honestly, reading your posts on this subject you seem a tad delusional.

Bill Wyman was publicly dating a 13 year old girl when he was around 50 years old (a guess, I don't know the ages). It was acknowledged in the press that he first had sex with her when she was 14. He actually married her when she was 18.

But that doesn't stop the fact that having sex with a 14 year old girl was illegal, is illegal and is significantly a more serious offence than what Harris is convicted of.

So I'll ask again, should the state be pursuing Wyman for that offence and do you want them to?

I'll ask you one question, do you think Rolf Harris sexually abused the people in question?

I think he probably did grope a lot of women. He probably wasn't overly fussed about the age of consent, so I think he probably groped girls too.

The women making allegations, I'm not sure. The prospect of easy money in compensation is too big a factor to ignore. The fact that an arm around the hip or waist can easily be changed to a hand on the buttocks or breast when it never actually happens means the charge is impossible to defend.

I do not believe that groping of over 16s has ever been counted as a form of genuine sexual abuse at any time apart from now. I don't believe that any of the thousands of waitresses or air hostesses who have been groped have felt that they were victims of sexual abuse. I think they were just extremely pi55ed that such an utter **** felt they could touch them. Or if they liked the guy they went home with him and screwed him.

I think it is ridiculous that groping is beyond the statute of limitations.

Reading the statements of the women making allegations against Harris I don't believe any of them felt anything like the impact they are now claiming. I don't believe that the innocence existed that they claim they had.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Mon Jul 07, 2014 6:52 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

I do not believe that groping of over 16s has ever been counted as a form of genuine sexual abuse at any time apart from now. I don't believe that any of the thousands of waitresses or air hostesses who have been groped have felt that they were victims of sexual abuse. I think they were just extremely pi55ed that such an utter **** felt they could touch them. Or if they liked the guy they went home with him and screwed him.

I think it is ridiculous that groping is beyond the statute of limitations.

You seem to have a strange concept of what constitutes sexual abuse then. You also seem to have very little respect for women and their expectation to be able to go through life without the unwanted physical attentions of anyone who may believe that it's OK to "cop a feel".

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Mon Jul 07, 2014 10:00 am  

On another note, what about the disappearance of the Dickens dossier? The details were said to be explosive and would blow the lid off the lives of powerful and famous child abusers. There must have been a few handshakes with fat brown envelopes to ensure the disappearance of those.

Can anyone in power and fame be trusted again?

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:00 am  

cod'ead wrote:

You seem to have a strange concept of what constitutes sexual abuse then. You also seem to have very little respect for women and their expectation to be able to go through life without the unwanted physical attentions of anyone who may believe that it's OK to "cop a feel".

Cambridge girl, the 16 year old waitress who was so traumatised that she thought she was 13. If that crime was witnessed by others, friends and independent people, then Harris would have been arrested if they'd reported it. In this case there was no other witness. So the cops would have just told her that it was her word against his and almost certain to go nowhere. If she insisted on making a report they'd follow it up, but it would be a waste of police time and everyone knows it.

But because she's waited 40 years before reporting it he's now sent to jail over it and she's going to be raking in tens of thousands in compensation for it? It's nonsense, on Nonce Sense, as Phil Collins would say.

Groping is clearly sexual abuse, but it's not the sexual abuse that the NSPCC is built on. It is not something that deserves to be alongside murder and rape as crimes that will be pursued for a lifetime.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:11 am  

King Street Cat wrote:

On another note, what about the disappearance of the Dickens dossier? The details were said to be explosive and would blow the lid off the lives of powerful and famous child abusers. There must have been a few handshakes with fat brown envelopes to ensure the disappearance of those.

Can anyone in power and fame be trusted again?

David Mellor was asked during a report over the weekend on TV about it and says he has seen the evidence. Rather than having explosive details he said it was exceptionally weak in terms of evidence.

But if we're going by the standards of Harris's trial, having exceptionally weak evidence won't matter. If someone claims to be a victim they'll be accepted as a victim and conviction rates are going to soar.

I've seen a list of supposed visitors to the Barnes guest house where all the famous people supposedly performed child abuse. If they are going to pursue them like they've pursued Harris then dozens of lives are going to be ruined.

Anyone who trusts people in power and famous people need to read some ****ing books and open their eyes while they go about their daily business.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Mon Jul 07, 2014 12:28 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Cambridge girl, the 16 year old waitress who was so traumatised that she thought she was 13. If that crime was witnessed by others, friends and independent people, then Harris would have been arrested if they'd reported it. In this case there was no other witness. So the cops would have just told her that it was her word against his and almost certain to go nowhere. If she insisted on making a report they'd follow it up, but it would be a waste of police time and everyone knows it.

But because she's waited 40 years before reporting it he's now sent to jail over it and she's going to be raking in tens of thousands in compensation for it? It's nonsense, on Nonce Sense, as Phil Collins would say.

Groping is clearly sexual abuse, but it's not the sexual abuse that the NSPCC is built on. It is not something that deserves to be alongside murder and rape as crimes that will be pursued for a lifetime.

As I said, you have a strange concept of what sexual abuse is and why people but especially females, should be able to go about their daily lives without concerning themselves that they may be subjected to unwanted and unwarranted touching.

A few weeks ago I was in a trans club and followed a very dear friend of mine across the upstairs bar area. A middle-aged guy walking towards us made a grab for her groin area, she managed a side-step that would be the envy of most half-backs and avoided him. As he passed me I grabbed him by the shoulder and asked what the fook he thought he was doing. Before he could answer, I asked if he would ever consider doing the same to a genetic girl in the street or a bar or club. He blushed, mumbled an half-assed apology and looked sheepish. I told him that if she'd been in the downstairs dark room or any "play" area, she might be seen as "fair game" but she was walking through a social area and as such, he should be expected to keep his hands to himself unless invited to do otherwise.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Mon Jul 07, 2014 1:02 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

As I said, you have a strange concept of what sexual abuse is and why people but especially females, should be able to go about their daily lives without concerning themselves that they may be subjected to unwanted and unwarranted touching.

A few weeks ago I was in a trans club and followed a very dear friend of mine across the upstairs bar area. A middle-aged guy walking towards us made a grab for her groin area, she managed a side-step that would be the envy of most half-backs and avoided him. As he passed me I grabbed him by the shoulder and asked what the fook he thought he was doing. Before he could answer, I asked if he would ever consider doing the same to a genetic girl in the street or a bar or club. He blushed, mumbled an half-assed apology and looked sheepish. I told him that if she'd been in the downstairs dark room or any "play" area, she might be seen as "fair game" but she was walking through a social area and as such, he should be expected to keep his hands to himself unless invited to do otherwise.

Do I think that she should have been subjected to that? Absolutely not. If I was with her I would have probably reacted in a similar manner to you. In fact if she was a close friend the guy would have probably been on the floor and I'd I've suffered a broken hand.

However, you are illustrating my point. He subjected her to an attempted groping. Your reaction to that was not to arrest him and call the police, your reaction to that was to basically threaten him a little and leave it at that.

Your assessment of an attempt at a form of sexual abuse was to issue a mild threat and a warning. If you believe that this is such a serious crime then the police should have been called. You know what would have happened. If he had a clean record and your friend wished to make a formal complaint he'd have probably received a caution. If he had previous for this then he'd have been charged. You and your friend chose to leave it because it wasn't worth all that hassle.

If you truly believe this is a serious form of sexual abuse then you should be talking with your friend and getting her to report this to the police. I don't think you do. I think the incident is just a sour memory and something you've both moved on from.

Re: Historical sexual abuse charges... : Mon Jul 07, 2014 1:31 pm  

Bill Wyman's case is an odd one. He married Mandy Smith and his son married Mandy Smith's mother. How do you work that one out at the Christmas lunch table? Who gets to carve the turkey?

If you want another conundrum how about Jimmy Page having his roadie kidnap a 14 year old model from a club so he could lock her in a room and do whatever Jimmy Page used to do. He kept the girl for 18 months - mostly under guard or locked up. Allegedly she is okay with it all.