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]In The Know wrote:[/b]
[quote][b]JK2006 wrote:[/b]
[quote]There are many ITK, as I've listed above; those defending delayed claims would say guilt, shame, lack of feeling they would be believed.....[/quote]

I can understand why someone may NEVER want to talk about it, JK, through shame etc, but "feeling they may not be believed"? If they were not going to be believed 40 years ago - why should they be believed today?

This is the easiest allegation in the world to make (esp historically, when you can be "fuzzy" with dates / places etc .... "I cant remember")

Surely we should expect consistency, and (if we are to believe them) clear logical reasons why they have delayed (esp when such delay has almost certainly put the accused at a disadvantage).

I know someone who was accused, and the complainant contacted the police immediately. Medical examination took place less than 3 hours after the alleged incident (the optimum time).

The defence's medical expert concluded that no assault had taken place at all - and when pressed (and re-called) the police medical doctor (reluctantly) agreed.

What if the complainant had waited a few years before complaining?[/quote]

Enter code here

Topic History of: Yet another one .......... !
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
In The Know	The Astrological Twin wrote: The idea that Jimmy Savile managed to abuse 450 people and NONE of them displayed any signs of distress at the time that might have alerted BBC staff to his alleged abuse is unbelievable. So true, AT
The Astrological Twin	We're also being asked to believed that these "victims" displayed no signs of trauma at the time of any alleged offence. If someone is raped, do they compose themselves and crack up 40 years later or do they start screaming "rape" or "help" and go immediately to the police? The idea that Jimmy Savile managed to abuse 450 people and NONE of them displayed any signs of distress at the time that might have alerted BBC staff to his alleged abuse is unbelievable. There is also the problem of people historically revising consent to have sex into abuse once, as was very well pointed out earlier by a poster whose name I forget, compensation might be available and no forensic evidence is available to prove or disprove any allegations against the dead.
JK2006	Oh I agree with you ITK; it's incredibly unfair legally and really cannot be justified but I do understand why Michael Howard enabled historical allegations - small children in care homes abused - physically, mentally or sexually - feel helpless and abusers should be brought to justice. The trouble is - he didn't think it through, it enabled all kinds of injustices (including mine) and has created a dreadful industry. I just don't buy into the theory that it's always greed or cash that provokes lies or exaggeration. There can be many different reasons.
In The Know	JK2006 wrote: There are many ITK, as I've listed above; those defending delayed claims would say guilt, shame, lack of feeling they would be believed..... I can understand why someone may NEVER want to talk about it, JK, through shame etc, but "feeling they may not be believed"? If they were not going to be believed 40 years ago - why should they be believed today? This is the easiest allegation in the world to make (esp historically, when you can be "fuzzy" with dates / places etc .... "I cant remember") Surely we should expect consistency, and (if we are to believe them) clear logical reasons why they have delayed (esp when such delay has almost certainly put the accused at a disadvantage). I know someone who was accused, and the complainant contacted the police immediately. Medical examination took place less than 3 hours after the alleged incident (the optimum time). The defence's medical expert concluded that no assault had taken place at all - and when pressed (and re-called) the police medical doctor (reluctantly) agreed. What if the complainant had waited a few years before complaining?
JK2006	There are many ITK, as I've listed above; those defending delayed claims would say guilt, shame, lack of feeling they would be believed... very few might suggest some people found themselves enjoying the experience but felt they shouldn't...