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 |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Rape
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
Jo |
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
I have very serious doubts too, Jo, but my point was that after choosing (or being brainwashed) to believe one crime happened, they allowed themselves to believe in something completely impossible.
I get the impression that a fair trial was never even attempted. 
Sorry, didn't see your reply. I see what you mean. That's a very good point. |
|
Jo |
md wrote:
In the opening paragraph of the letter Rolf Harris wrote to her father, it states that the father had written back saying that he didn't want to see or hear from Rolf again. If Rolf had done something illegal, wouldn't it have been more likely for the father to have gone to the police instead of writing a letter back?
That's a good point. Perhaps he could have persuaded his daughter to go to police. The letter was apparently written in March 1997, and she was reportedly 49 in 2014, making her around 32 in 1997.
I think it's significant that her revelation that she had been involved with Rolf Harris (according to his daughter's ex partner: when she was below the age of consent, according to his daughter: when she was of consenting age) seems to have happened in Rolf Harris's home when his daughter and her partner not only had a new baby but his daughter had disclosed that her father was having an affair with another woman.
But late one evening in 1996, at the TV presenter’s home in Bray, Berkshire, she dramatically confided in Bindi and Mr Cox, who had just become parents.
Mr Cox recalled how Bindi’s friend told him ‘that there had been a sexual relationship between the two, between Rolf and her, and it had occurred before the age of 16.’ He added: ‘The inference was that it was an underage relationship – definitely.’
...
Under cross-examination by Sonia Woodley QC, defending, Mr Cox said his relationship with Bindi ended ‘acrimoniously’, adding that he had never been ‘well disposed’ towards Harris.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2635124...ke-artist-shift.html
Nicholls, 50, told jurors she learned about the secret relationship when she raised suspicions that Harris was having an affair with a spiritual healer who was treating him for depression.
Nicholls said she confided in her best friend, who cannot be named for legal reasons, about the suspected affair with the healer – and was shocked by her friend's reaction.
She said: "It was very odd. She was saying things like: 'The bitch, the old cow, she's ugly, what does he see in her? Your dad's a right bastard.' I was really shocked. It felt like she was in love with my dad which was just weird.
"It was like a light went off in my head and I asked: 'Have you been seeing my dad? Has something happened between you and my dad?' and she said yes. I was really shocked and she was really shocked that I had said anything."
The court heard that Nicholls's friend then confessed that she had been having an 11-year affair with Harris that started when she was 18 or 19 years old.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/02/...icidal-affair-friend |
|
md |
Jo wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
If someone commits one crime, like Rolf Harris with his daughter's Friend (we have to assume) the jury will believe that they are guilty of every other crime they are accused of, even if it is screamingly impossible, like the small child in the crummy community centre gig that never even happened.
I think every single charge should be dealt with in court separately.
I don't believe he committed a crime with his daughter's friend, i.e. molested her when she was below the age of consent, rather that she revised her age downwards and reframed consensual contact as non-consensual, as suggested to her by the Jimmy Savile allegations, in order to obtain the money she had unsuccessfully attempted to extract from him before. I think his behaviour was morally reprehensible, i.e. cheating on his wife and betraying his daughter's trust by being involved with her friend (when she was of consenting age), but am not convinced he did anything illegal. Plus, since he clearly was someone who was unfaithful, I think that if he had had a predilection for underage girls, the prosecution would have succeeded in finding actual victims rather than the other three (plus the extra 'gropees' from outside the UK), whose allegations were bogus in my view.
In the opening paragraph of the letter Rolf Harris wrote to her father, it states that the father had written back saying that he didn't want to see or hear from Rolf again. If Rolf had done something illegal, wouldn't it have been more likely for the father to have gone to the police instead of writing a letter back? |
|
honey!oh sugar sugar. |
Jo wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
If someone commits one crime, like Rolf Harris with his daughter's Friend (we have to assume) the jury will believe that they are guilty of every other crime they are accused of, even if it is screamingly impossible, like the small child in the crummy community centre gig that never even happened.
I think every single charge should be dealt with in court separately.
I don't believe he committed a crime with his daughter's friend, i.e. molested her when she was below the age of consent, rather that she revised her age downwards and reframed consensual contact as non-consensual, as suggested to her by the Jimmy Savile allegations, in order to obtain the money she had unsuccessfully attempted to extract from him before. I think his behaviour was morally reprehensible, i.e. cheating on his wife and betraying his daughter's trust by being involved with her friend (when she was of consenting age), but am not convinced he did anything illegal. Plus, since he clearly was someone who was unfaithful, I think that if he had had a predilection for underage girls, the prosecution would have succeeded in finding actual victims rather than the other three (plus the extra 'gropees' from outside the UK), whose allegations were bogus in my view.
I have very serious doubts too, Jo, but my point was that after choosing (or being brainwashed) to believe one crime happened, they allowed themselves to believe in something completely impossible.
I get the impression that a fair trial was never even attempted. |
|
Randall |
I appreciate both sides of the argument. Wyot makes good points about someone's past deeds not necessarily having a bearing on the current matters at issue. Hedda is absolutely right that if one side can use such information, the other side MUST be allowed too: equality of arms. And of course, fuller context might be thought to give a jury a better chance of making a correct decision.
But here's the point you're all missing. Prosecutions for such a serious crime should not rely on peripheral or incidental context which might not be indicative of guilt or innocence. Only trials where there is genuinely compelling evidence to corroborate an accusation should be held. Any case which has to rely on "he is, or has been, in circumstances unrelated to the alleged incident in question, a rotter" to bolster the accusation is by definition weak and incapable of meeting the standard of proof. The logical next step, as I sometimes argue for here, is to abolish rape and other so-called sexual crimes. Drugging someone into a stupor or physically overpowering them creates evidence that can be presented in a trial. This behaviour is already prohibited in law. There's no good reason to bother with the confused legal mess of consent and how to prove/disprove it.
Totally agree about bundling. The rationale is that many similar allegations demonstrate a pattern of behaviour which has a probative value to the jury. The howling problem with this is that it is begging the question (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question). It assumes the truth of the very proposition to be tested. Also, these similar allegations are often not very similar at all, just any old cobblers thrown into the pot, as JK describes. |
|
|
|
|
