cartoon

















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.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
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:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: Stuart Hall
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
JK2006 How do you defend yourself - that you did not fondle a girl thirty years ago?

The law is really quite extraordinary (as I found in 2000). Without evidence, it is impossible to prove you DIDN'T do something, especially when (as in Hall's case) the time stated is a whole year.

I was able, eventually, to prove I could not have committed the crimes alleged during the years claimed - so they changed the dates without allowing me to find alternative defence for the new time frames.

And since my release I've found solid proof I could not have committed the crimes during the new time frames.

The CCRC (meant to be fighting for fair results) says it's not WHEN but WHETHER that matters - ignoring the fact that the age of consent laws make it a crime if one minute earlier than the 16th birthday.

Laws over allegations without evidence need changing immediately.

Anna Raccoon's as usual excellent commentary...

www.annaraccoon.com/politics/child-abuse/
Powered by Kunena
 
© 2005 – 2025 King of Hits.co.uk