So now another DJ - Neil (Dr) Fox has been arrested on historical sex offence charges.....

 

Seriously, when is this going to end? I fully appreciate that any sex offence is abhorrent; but whether or not he "did" what he has been accused of, in different times, we had different tolerance levels and different degrees of what was and was not acceptable behaviour. Besides, in all honesty, unless the accused actually admits his crime, then in the absence of hard and undisputed evidence, surely any jury must acquit on the grounds of "reasonable doubt"

 

In most incidences, after 20 or more years, it's just a case of "he said, she said"

 

IMO there should be a statute of limitations on such issues - and after x years, there cannot be any reasonable, substantial, case for someone to answer to. Plus why waste tax payers' money in attempting to secure a conviction so long after the event. Surely police and CPS time is better spent elsewhere - like investigating current issues and maintaining law and order in the present day.

 

I don't mean to demean real victims of abuse, but anyone attempting to jump on the bandwagon of accusing celebrities of a historic sex crime should bloody well get over themselves and move on. If it was so traumatic, then why not report it 20 years ago FFS......:nono:

Well said Richard :hammer:

Well I guess quite a few beasts got away with their shenanigans for long enough, what goes around should eventually come around, apparently.

 

I think you should make it clear that your post is regarding adult accusers though. Celebrities that have used their public personas and privileged positions to procure prepubescant persons peadophilically should always be brought to justice and their actions made public knowledge, regardless of timescale.

 

It's an interesting topic, but one for the pub, methinks :wack:

we,ve all grabbed a bit and poked around...hell iff everything came to light what i have done then ime looking down the barrel of 90 years with no parole. Its is getting a bit silly now imho and as Richard has pointed out why has it taken so long to report this tit grabbing from these now mentaly damaged poor women:rolleyes:...No win no fee anyone???:yes:

 

Disclaimer....the likes of Mr Jimmy Savile is another and genuine case all together:mad:

Edited September 30, 201411 yr by znut

Well I guess quite a few beasts got away with their shenanigans for long enough, what goes around should eventually come around, apparently.

 

I think you should make it clear that your post is regarding adult accusers though. Celebrities that have used their public personas and privileged positions to procure prepubescant persons peadophilically should always be brought to justice and their actions made public knowledge, regardless of timescale.

 

It's an interesting topic, but one for the pub, methinks :wack:

 

Good point Noel - and I agree with you on the paedophilia issues - but even then, in these historic cases, the accusers are now in fact adults and could easily be jumping on yet another band wagon. I do believe Jimmy Saville was guilty; but he remains dead and cannot defend himself - the police and CPS are over-reacting in the wake of the Jimmy Saville case because they clearly failed in their duties at the time.

 

As I said in my opening comments, ANY sex abusers/predators are abhorrent. But how can the CPS reasonably try anyone, in the absence of a confession (like Stuart Hall), or hard evidence if the alleged incident occurred 20+ years ago?

Its a difficult one to discuss but today after hearing the news on Dr Fox my wife said "there's another one jumping on the bandwagon and why did she not speak up at the time" so I find that an interesting woman's point of view on the subject.

What Serbs to get forgotten is many of these people have had previous allegations against them, sometimes the same people that are coming forward now were silenced at the time. Certainly that went on with Saville.

 

My theory is that a public figure head or politician was at the top of this house of cards and something has happened to them. They have either they have died or they're bribes have failed. The whole house of cards has come tumbling down with them, leaving the abused open to come forward.

What Serbs to get forgotten is many of these people have had previous allegations against them, sometimes the same people that are coming forward now were silenced at the time. Certainly that went on with Saville. .

 

this ^.

how many things that happened to or affected you in the past, do you still think about from time to time today?

some altercation, fight, wrong doing to you?

now imagine if that was something that you know was wrong and possibly was a violation of you in some way.

it will continue to nag away at you as long as you are alive/

 

now that the accusations are being taken seriously, people will come forward if they think there is a chance they will now be believed rather than dismissed.

 

however, it is difficult to detmermine which of the allegations are now worth pursuing and which are not

But how can the CPS reasonably try anyone, in the absence of a confession (like Stuart Hall), or hard evidence if the alleged incident occurred 20+ years ago?

 

Clearly the jury believed the account of the victim rather than that of the defendant in the Dave Lee Travis trial and he was found guilty.

Statute of limitations is a good idea in some respects. However, if your mother, aunt, sister, wife or daughter was raped/sexually assulted when younger (not necessarily when a minor) and kept it secret, buried for decades and then some event brought it to the surface. How would you feel about statute of limitations preventing them from prosecuting?

suppose the attacker was very much still alive and enjoying life and your loved one reveals a horror story?

It's clear that the public are now weary of the relentless wave of these allegations but they need to be pursued nonetheless. If Savile was still alive would we tell his victims that they could only make a complaint if they were a minor/child at the time of the offence?

 

Just a thought...

This is a fair point as many victims apparently feel shame and embarrassment towards themselves over these crimes, so the experts say. Horrific crimes like these should never go unpunished. With that said today morality and yesterday's vary, for example to marry a girl of 14 or 15 years ago was perfectly acceptable and still is in many countries, however in this country at this time you can be punished for this and it's morally unacceptable, the reason I make this point is the attitudes to what is acceptable conduct with women has changed a lot over the last 50 years and that must be taken into account. There is in my mind a very clear line however between molestation and moral faux pars.

 

We struggle in this day and age to let the guilty hang and let the unfortunate mistakes slide.

Clearly the jury believed the account of the victim rather than that of the defendant in the Dave Lee Travis trial and he was found guilty.

 

I agree Andrew - but it does come down to which account is more believable after the passing of the years; as opposed to actual hard, conclusive evidence. And if DLT appeals, his lawyers *may* have an easy task in convincing another jury that there is "reasonable doubt."

 

Although that is conjecture on my part; I was not in the court room nor have I seen all the evidence presented!!

 

And to follow up Steve's point, Jimmy Saville aside, have Dr Fox, Sir Cliff Richard, Jim Davidson, DLT, had previous such allegations made against them? And if so, by any of the same people coming forward now?

This is a fair point as many victims apparently feel shame and embarrassment towards themselves over these crimes, so the experts say. Horrific crimes like these should never go unpunished. With that said today morality and yesterday's vary, for example to marry a girl of 14 or 15 years ago was perfectly acceptable and still is in many countries, however in this country at this time you can be punished for this and it's morally unacceptable, the reason I make this point is the attitudes to what is acceptable conduct with women has changed a lot over the last 50 years and that must be taken into account. There is in my mind a very clear line however between molestation and moral faux pars.

 

We struggle in this day and age to let the guilty hang and let the unfortunate mistakes slide.

 

Agreed - if you are referring to rape and paedophilia. And Agreed....:wink:

Edited October 1, 201411 yr by RichardS

I agree Andrew - but it does come down to which account is more believable after the passing of the years; as opposed to actual hard, conclusive evidence. And if DLT appeals, his lawyers *may* have an easy task in convincing another jury that there is "reasonable doubt."

 

Although that is conjecture on my part; I was not in the court room nor have I seen all the evidence presented!!

 

And to follow up Steve's point, Jimmy Saville aside, have Dr Fox, Sir Cliff Richard, Jim Davidson, DLT, had previous such allegations made against them? And if so, by any of the same people coming forward now?

 

Don't forget Rolfaroo! John Peel was a bit naughty too.

The puzzling thing in this is the hub of the wheel seems to be old BBC ex-employeers!! be it radio or television. :confused:

Don't forget Rolfaroo! John Peel was a bit naughty too.

 

I had forgotten about those two to be honest; but that does not mean that each and every celebrity who receives similar allegations against them is guilty too. Innocent until proven guilty, remember - so just because a couple of personalities were convicted, it does not give licence for people to throw accusations at all and sundry.

 

What really, and I mean REALLY stinks in these cases, is that the alleged victim gets granted anonymity ad-infinitum; even if charges are dropped or a jury acquits the person - but the accused's name remains out there and people will always remember the arrest, as mud sticks.....

What really, and I mean REALLY stinks in these cases, is that the alleged victim gets granted anonymity ad-infinitum; even if charges are dropped or a jury acquits the person - but the accused's name remains out there and people will always remember the arrest, as mud sticks.....

 

Well perhaps there is some movement to address:

 

"whether people who were accused of sex allegations should be allowed to remain anonymous before any

charges are brought, or a trial starts."

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11131444/Innocent-people-accused-of-sex-crimes-could-be-granted-anonymity-Chris-Grayling-suggests.html

Edited October 1, 201411 yr by AndrewG

It's about time that men (it's not always men but typically it is) realised that "no" means "no".

It's unfortunate that many powerful people over the ages have used their power / status to get away with appalling behaviour (whether sexual or not).

It's about time that people who benefit from the trappings of power / celebrity took the responsibility that comes with it: not just "don't be a dick" but also "don't behave in a way that makes you look like a dick".

If you claim to be a human being, you need to treat those around you with respect. If you're not sure, don't assume their acquiescence means "yes". If you're not 100% sure, you're a real sh*t if you go any further.

(and if you think that's extreme, imagine any of this happening to one you love on the receiving end: mother / wife / daughter /son - you would expect, and rightly so, the other party to be very sure of their willingness, wouldn't you?).

Someone brighter than I once defined an arsehole as someone who knows what the rules are but assumes that they don't apply to him.

If there is ever a case where the "alleged victim" is a powerful, media-savvy person and the perpetrator is young, naive and weak, then maybe I'll allow that victims should not be anonymous. All the cases so far referenced here don't show this to be the case.

Or in other words, keep it zipped and keep your hands to yourself.

If you're in the public eye, you need to do this double - if you don't like the standards, don't take the fame.

Well perhaps there is some movement to address:

 

"whether people who were accused of sex allegations should be allowed to remain anonymous before any

charges are brought, or a trial starts."

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11131444/Innocent-people-accused-of-sex-crimes-could-be-granted-anonymity-Chris-Grayling-suggests.html

 

The people referenced in this article as those proven innocent are: Jimmy Tarbuck, Freddie Starr and Nigel Evans MP. I am happy to believe the court's verdict. I do not believe any of these three people need special treatment or protection: they have money, political connections, PR agencies, can afford lawyers and, in general, can look after themselves. It is society's reponsibility to look after those less fortunate and if that means protecting the weak more than the strong, that's what being human means.

So who started it all ? Or rather, who was the first to get caught ? Jonathan King ??

 

He fronted a programme in the late 80`s early 90`s called "Entairtainment USA" Used to be one of my favourites back then.

 

Alan.......................

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

For the younger set amongst us !!!!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_King

 

Alan...............

So who started it all ? Or rather, who was the first to get caught ? Jonathan King ??

 

He fronted a programme in the late 80`s early 90`s called "Entairtainment USA" Used to be one of my favourites back then.

 

Alan.......................

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

For the younger set amongst us !!!!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_King

 

Alan...............

 

LOL - yeah, old slanty-mouth.... He was the first to (ahem) go down - years before the Jimmy Saville issue hit the headlines. Jimmy Saville was always a wrong-un though; he had the authorities in his pockets hence got away with it for the rest of his life.....

 

.... And whilst I don't believe people like him should ever get away with their abhorrent crimes, I started this thread because I still believe that a lot of the current celebrity arrests are knee-jerk reactions in the wake of the police and CPS getting the Jimmy Saville issue so wrong; and because a fair few opportunists have jumped on that bandwagon. And in the event that a few (now) old guys may have pinched a few arses or groped a few boobs 30-40 years ago, it *may* have been more acceptable then, than now - so we should not judge such lewd behaviour by modern moral standards, but appreciate that times were different back then.

 

Rolf was a surprise for me, when he was arrested - but as his trial progressed, I changed my mind and thought he was actually guilty....

 

DLT? Yes he was found guilty; but of just one offence, wasn't it? - he was acquitted of all the others. And the judge passed a lenient sentence and did not insist DLT signs the sex offenders' register - what does that tell you - it suggests to me, that the judge *may* not be entirely convinced of the jury's decision. Just my humble opinion, only time will tell there. Maybe.

 

Stuart Hall? He admitted everything - he did it and his conscience encouraged him to do the right thing.

 

The others - how many more will there be? Who knows? Rape and paedophilia should not go unpunished - but some over-the-hill celebrity getting accused of copping a feel from someone who *may* have put themselves up for it some 30+ years ago? Hmmmm.......:rolleyes: The human brain has a habit of "recollecting" issues from years ago, but updating them with current thoughts and embellishing them as time passes on; so it's very easy for that "squeeze" to become a full-on hand in the pants after a few years.....

 

.....And what about all the groupies bedded by the likes of Sir Mick Jagger and co in the 60s and 70s? How long before one or two hundred of those come forward to say they didn't actually consent at the time because they were drunk/stoned/whatever, so they must have been raped?

 

That is what I mean when I say there should be some statute of limitations; or a sense of reason by the police and CPS. And perhaps a little courtesy/discretion from the media until there is actually something REALLY newsworthy to report....

 

I hope Dr Fox is innocent - only time will tell once again - and I will feel bad for starting this discussion if he turns out to be the next Jimmy Saville. But somehow I don't think he will...:wink:

 

Richard:clover:

And the judge passed a lenient sentence and did not insist DLT signs the sex offenders' register

 

DLT will be placed on the sex offenders register for a period of 7 years even though his sentence was suspended.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/30/1412098687500_wps_22_SHOWBIZ_Awards_Pop_Idol_P.jpg

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

Chuckle chuckle!!

DLT will be placed on the sex offenders register for a period of 7 years even though his sentence was suspended.

 

Really? Was that decided afterwards; as all reports I read said specifically that he would not be placed on it....:confused:

Really? Was that decided afterwards; as all reports I read said specifically that he would not be placed on it....:confused:

 

Found it.....

 

"Travis, who was not ordered to sign the Sex Offenders Register because the indecent assault was committed in 1995, before the register was introduced, left court hand-in-hand with his wife Marianne, 66."

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2770701/BREAKING-NEWS-Dave-Lee-Travis-escapes-jail-TV-personality-attacked-Mrs-Merton-says-called-liar-fantasist-painful.html#ixzz3F6xXyi4g

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2770701/BREAKING-NEWS-Dave-Lee-Travis-escapes-jail-TV-personality-attacked-Mrs-Merton-says-called-liar-fantasist-painful.html

Its funny how time changes a lot of things ?

 

Benny Hill used to be funny, now he is seen as an old lech ?

 

Golliwogs used to advertise marmalade ?

 

Black and white minstrels used to be family entertainment ?

 

Top Gear used to be good ? (too soon ) ?

 

And now it turns out that the only star from the 70`s that wasnt a deviant was a Dalek !! Stairs was his downfall !!

 

I blame Calimero meself ! Its An Injustice !!

 

Alan.........