42 replies to this topic

[slindborg]

Assuming the 'victims' currently in the lime light enjoying cash for their stories and any compensation from the stars are actually genuinely victims. If their plight was so terrible and the people doing it were so evil why has it taken 30years to come out..... I'm very cynical about this and it's just wrong how it has all been handled.

[myles]

Assuming the 'victims' currently in the lime light enjoying cash for their stories and any compensation from the stars are actually genuinely victims. If their plight was so terrible and the people doing it were so evil why has it taken 30years to come out..... I'm very cynical about this and it's just wrong how it has all been handled.

 

Thats the shitty community we call Great Britain. Claims for cock all, loans at 5000%, people robbing their next door neighbours, stabbing each ohter for nothing. I'm not surprised you are cynical.

[turbobob]

Assuming the 'victims' currently in the lime light enjoying cash for their stories and any compensation from the stars are actually genuinely victims. If their plight was so terrible and the people doing it were so evil why has it taken 30years to come out..... I'm very cynical about this and it's just wrong how it has all been handled.

I agree with you. 

[jonnyboy]

I must admit I'm quite cynical about a lot of these allegations. I believe one of DLTs supposed crimes is that he slipped his hand up a 16 year old girls skirt at a party when he was 19. Now that just sounds like a good night out to me not grounds for getting your name dragged through Court. Jim Davidson and a couple of lower profile people have already had charges dropped and I suspect anyone pleading not guilty at court will go free too. Stewart Hall was a surprise admittedly. The sad thing about all this is that when all the celebs go to Court and get found not guilty it will put off victims being abused now because it will re enforce the idea that they won't be believed.

[myles]

I must admit I'm quite cynical about a lot of these allegations. I believe one of DLTs supposed crimes is that he slipped his hand up a 16 year old girls skirt at a party when he was 19. Now that just sounds like a good night out to me not grounds for getting your name dragged through Court. Jim Davidson and a couple of lower profile people have already had charges dropped and I suspect anyone pleading not guilty at court will go free too. Stewart Hall was a surprise admittedly. The sad thing about all this is that when all the celebs go to Court and get found not guilty it will put off victims being abused now because it will re enforce the idea that they won't be believed.

 

The CPS need to be dealing more sensibly with crimes such as the DLT example above. FFS, that isn't worthy surely?

[bunsenburner]

I must admit I'm quite cynical about a lot of these allegations. I believe one of DLTs supposed crimes is that he slipped his hand up a 16 year old girls skirt at a party when he was 19. Now that just sounds like a good night out to me not grounds for getting your name dragged through Court.

The problem here is the law, not those prosecuting. It does seem silly that if there's two consenting 15yr olds the boy is prosecuted for rape and put on the sex offenders register. However that is the law and it is the police's and the CPS's job to enforce the laws.

[jonnyboy]

I think the CPS are probably a bit over keen to be seen to be doing their job in the light of letting Saville slip through the net for 50 years.

[Goosenka]

Feel very saddened by it.

[Rudy]

Feel very saddened by it.

Yeh that I remember Rolfs cartoon time, watched it when I was a young un. Was amazed by his drawing skills and encouraged me and my brother to sketch cartoons.

[Andrew aka Stuwy]

This may sound bad, but I don't care.. 

 

If they have done wrong punish them but I don't want to hear about it..

 

the papers allege to bring news but they actually don't care either, they just think about money.. higher moral high ground within scum is not very high...

[moospeed]

Find it all quite hard to believe. I wouldn't want to know the specifics of each case but the sheer number of these stories coming out is a bit disturbing. I mean, on a percentage basis of "people off the telly from the seventies" how can that be realistic. Is it the same today? Do I walk down the street and think that every tenth person I go past is a perv?

[siztenboots]

paraphrased from wikipedia

 

The history here is the age of consent for heterosexual acts in England was set at 12 in 1275 during the reign of Edward I.

 

A concern that young girls were being sold into brothels led Parliament to raise the age of consent to 13 in 1875 under the Offences against the Person Act 1875.

 

Then in 1885 , after W. T. Stead's Maiden Tribute articles, the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 raised the age of consent to 16 which is what we have today.

 

Now you may think the Victorian era is not relevant to you , but just go back a couple of generations and ask how old where your great grandparents when they got married.

 

[Darcini]

Now you may think the Victorian era is not relevant to you , but just go back a couple of generations and ask how old where your great grandparents when they got married.  

WTF? Is that some kind of attempt to justify sex with minors? What has the Victorian era got to do with the sexual abuse of children today? Slavery was perfectly legal at one time, does that mean it's ok to pop over to the Ivory Coast, bop a couple of the locals over the head and bring them back home so they can mow the lawn without pay (and any basic human rights)? The batty old woman down the road, reckon she's a witch so I fancy burning her at the stake, they used to do that in the olden days so that'll be alright. I mean, really?

[siztenboots]

no its not attempt to justify sex with minors, but you made a pretty clumsy attempt to say I did.

 

is this a moral issue, or a legal one?

 

why is it acceptable in France at 15 , Germany (and many other european countries) 14 , Spain 13

[Darcini]

But we are not France, Germany, Spain or any other country are we? Or still living in the Victorian era?

So what is your point in relation to the allegations concerning Rolf Harris?  

Are you saying it should be morally acceptable that a middle aged man can grope a 14 year old girl? Whether the girl consents or not?

If you consider my post clumsy you really ought to take a better look at your own.

[FLD]

My old dear is a little skeptical of it saying it was 'cool' at the time to get yourself touched up by a celebrity.  She's not entirely sure its all the celebrities fault.  However, as a public figure they need to have impeccable morals and accept responsibility for their actions.

[Zoobeef]

I don't understand the underage thing. There's 16-18 year old girls that look very young indeed yet you can do what you like and its legal. Inappropriate maybe but still legal.

[Mike (Cliffie)]

I don't understand the underage thing. There's 16-18 year old girls that look very young indeed yet you can do what you like and its legal. Inappropriate maybe but still legal.

Only in Doncaster.

[bunsenburner]

But we are not France, Germany, Spain or any other country are we? Or still living in the Victorian era?

So what is your point in relation to the allegations concerning Rolf Harris?  

Are you saying it should be morally acceptable that a middle aged man can grope a 14 year old girl? Whether the girl consents or not?

If you consider my post clumsy you really ought to take a better look at your own.

 

 

It is very relevant to the discussion whether sex in France at 15yrs is deemed okay, but classified as rape or abuse in the UK.

 

One of those laws is surely "wrong".  Rolf Harris is being judged against a number of these laws, so it is perfectly acceptable to debate the seriousness of the alleged crime.

 

His actions decades ago are also being judged against today's morals.  Imagine if the authorities took a look at smacking children - prevalent in the 70s but illegal today.

 

There are countless examples where criminals get off scott free, and also where innocent people are unnecessarily pursecuted.

 

The law can be very black and white sometimes and the words used are very emotive.  Real life however is very grey.

 

All I can hope is that justice is served and that the punishment fits the crime.

[turbobob]

 

Now you may think the Victorian era is not relevant to you , but just go back a couple of generations and ask how old where your great grandparents when they got married.  

WTF? Is that some kind of attempt to justify sex with minors? What has the Victorian era got to do with the sexual abuse of children today? Slavery was perfectly legal at one time, does that mean it's ok to pop over to the Ivory Coast, bop a couple of the locals over the head and bring them back home so they can mow the lawn without pay (and any basic human rights)? The batty old woman down the road, reckon she's a witch so I fancy burning her at the stake, they used to do that in the olden days so that'll be alright. I mean, really?

 

I don't think Steve is saying that it is acceptable. But in Victorian times it was acceptable. Morals, ethics and laws evolve and change. Some things that are acceptable now won't be acceptable in 100 years.