King of Hits.co.uk - Your Views Messageboard

IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Home

Forums

	Messageboards	Categories Show latest posts

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register. Lost Password?

Messageboards

King of Hits

Your Views Messageboard

Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"

Name:

Subject:

Boardcode:

Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons





More Smilies

[b]JK2006 wrote:[/b]
[quote]I hear there is an investigation going on about individuals having "an unhealthy interest in victims of sexual abuse".

This is targeted at those who, for financial or sexual reasons, cross the lines when interviewing, for example. Police or others who break the rules (always have at least two people at every interview; don't make private, solo visits to victims at home, etc)...

There have been several internal investigations in the past. It is recognised that those involved can be seduced across to "the other side".

But I predict another aspect will emerge soon. Allegations of assault and even rape will be made by victims against [b]investigators[/b] crossing the line and taking advantage of vulnerable people. Sympathetic questions can provoke emotional reactions followed by comforting affection. And if that then goes further - trouble.

Especially now those victims know they don't need evidence to back up their complaints - and that there is huge compensation - not just from the courts but from the organisations employing these perpetrators... especially if the BBC do agree to pay compensation to "victims" of dead people.

If Michael Le Vell had been found GUILTY, we all know there would have been claims against Granada and ITV for employing him. I'm sure such money making methods are taught at these conventions about the false allegations industry.

TV shows interviewing victims of abuse have the protection of several people (crew, researchers etc) being present at all times - therefore being able to contradict accusations. But God forbid anyone, such as print journalists, foolish enough to have made private, individual, solo visits to private homes before or (even worse) after those interview sessions. Especially if the "victims" being interviewed were predisposed to invent or inflate claims. It will strike some of those victims that any "crossing of the line" could be hard to disprove and would result in very large compensation from the big corporations behind the offending employees.

It will happen. Just wait and watch.[/quote]

Enter code here

Topic History of: Nervous times for those in the false allegations industry
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
hedda	I have long said there is a Perfect Storm coming in all of this : and if the BBC caves in and pays claimants without investigating then it will be open season. I cannot believe other great minds and thinkers cannot see this as well. # it is interesting watching events unfold in Australia which has many of the same elements of the UK yet things never go quite as far ( I put this down to half the Anglo Celt population once enjoying relative wealth and sunshine become freed of much of the pettiness of life and the other being European have never been that hysterical about sex). NSW now have brought in a 10 year time limit for crime compo claims (but it's trigger was 'historic' sex claims). The howls of anguish from the protection industry have been loud. Australia has a coming Royal Commission into child abuse in all institutions. It began as one just about the Catholic Church (the hatred for the Catholics in Oz is quite bizarre). I know for a fact several submissions are before the Commission specifically dealing with the 'self appointed' protection industry who reap in millions of dollars but do little except fan hysteria. the recent collapse of SISHA - run by ex Brit & Oz coppers in Cambodia , is the tip of the iceberg. I know Gina Rinehart is fuming having just donated millions$$ and now realising they have used it to buy Range Rovers, give themselves huge wages and rent luxury houses. ## a Thai based Fleet Street stringer so vocal in the GG & Kelly cases is planning to flee back to the UK...a developing story.
JK2006	As in all cases, Jim, some will be true, some false and some in between - exaggerated or inflated. Much of the evidence against me was essentially true (how we met, how many times they visited my home, the music we listened to, meals we enjoyed, films we went to etc...) and then only the "sex" part was invented. But there were some (including the claims that started the investigation - thrown out by the judge) that were 100% false; I'd never even met the man concerned. That's the trouble with court cases - "evidence" can be put forward to prove the truth of much claimed but not the crucial "offence" part of the charge. Jurors and Judges therefore think - understandably - "well they've told the truth about meeting and knowing and visiting - why would they lie about the sex?". It was one reason why the police and CPS told all my false accusers they MUST say they enjoyed it - otherwise why did they keep coming back (in one case - over 50 times)? Of course the answer was - in reality - they were having a wonderful time because they were NOT having sex. So police/CPS made them all claim to be under 16 where they could not consent even if they enjoyed it. And why, in so many cases, we managed to prove they would have been OVER 16 at that time.
Jim	Do you mean to suggest that these allegations will be false?
JK2006	I hear there is an investigation going on about individuals having "an unhealthy interest in victims of sexual abuse". This is targeted at those who, for financial or sexual reasons, cross the lines when interviewing, for example. Police or others who break the rules (always have at least two people at every interview; don't make private, solo visits to victims at home, etc)... There have been several internal investigations in the past. It is recognised that those involved can be seduced across to "the other side". But I predict another aspect will emerge soon. Allegations of assault and even rape will be made by victims against investigators crossing the line and taking advantage of vulnerable people. Sympathetic questions can provoke emotional reactions followed by comforting affection. And if that then goes further - trouble. Especially now those victims know they don't need evidence to back up their complaints - and that there is huge compensation - not just from the courts but from the organisations employing these perpetrators... especially if the BBC do agree to pay compensation to "victims" of dead people. If Michael Le Vell had been found GUILTY, we all know there would have been claims against Granada and ITV for employing him. I'm sure such money making methods are taught at these conventions about the false allegations industry. TV shows interviewing victims of abuse have the protection of several people (crew, researchers etc) being present at all times - therefore being able to contradict accusations. But God forbid anyone, such as print journalists, foolish enough to have made private, individual, solo visits to private homes before or (even worse) after those interview sessions. Especially if the "victims" being interviewed were predisposed to invent or inflate claims. It will strike some of those victims that any "crossing of the line" could be hard to disprove and would result in very large compensation from the big corporations behind the offending employees. It will happen. Just wait and watch.