I do not suppose this will escape board keeper censors but let's hope that 2014 brings even more justice for victims of celebrity abuse over the past 50 years. Many more groupies will come forward after this Rolf Harris trial exposing more recent music and media stars - take that all you big names currently hoping to escape exposure. Justice is moving in one direction. And soon politicians and other social abusers will come into the spotlight. Cabinet ministers are nervous.

marvelous isn't it..all these people/victims have been silent for 30 / 40 /50 years about the shocking abuse that happened to them until a TV show (full of holes and liars)opened the floodgates while the media promotes the biggest load of hogwash going - that somehow politicians and celebrities were so powerful they were untouchable for the past few decades.

all these years I read the News of The World as vicars, ordinary folk, coppers, politicians, pop stars were being exposed left right and centre for their foibles (where real or imagined)....I must have imagined it all !!

I'm sure I did..I asked my newsagent and he said, "no, there is no such newspaper as the News Of the World"

Fair Speak ?..is that the same Fair Speak who fiddled with me when I was a lad ?..must be. it's all coming back..yes it was you

Fair Speak wrote:
I do not suppose this will escape board keeper censors but let's hope that 2014 brings even more justice for victims of celebrity abuse over the past 50 years. Many more groupies will come forward after this Rolf Harris trial exposing more recent music and media stars - take that all you big names currently hoping to escape exposure. Justice is moving in one direction. And soon politicians and other social abusers will come into the spotlight. Cabinet ministers are nervous.

I think most of us hope for protection and justice for ALL victims, not just those involved with celebrities.

Which cabinet ministers are nervous? Is this speculation or do you have information that should be reported?

Fair Speak for Fair Trials?

Fair Speak is representative of the vast majority of people who automatically think a celebrity is guilty, providing some accuser comes out of the wood - albeit decades later.
I will await the trial, and hope that the jury are capable of reaching a decision based on the truth, although one wonders what proof will be available to either side. Even if Rolf proves he was in a different place when the offence took place - they will change the date as happened with JK's trial
Fair Trial rather than Fair Speak

So kind of police and CPS to do this on December 23rd; just in case his Christmas wasn't ruined enough... but putting the boot into a man in his 80s is such fun, isn't it? Our delightfully vindictive society will spend Christmas Day pulling the wings off flies.

I've just disowned part of my family over lies of a similar nature made by a relative against another relative. Well, rather she blamed her father first but because that wasn't accepted, she blamed her uncle next, and that was accepted. Families, huh?

Oh and the lie is at least 50 years old.

Thank goodness that we have some fine upstanding police officers to investigate such offences !!!!!!!!

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-25491683

stones? .... glass houses?

Fair Speak wrote:
I do not suppose this will escape board keeper censors but let's hope that 2014 brings even more justice for victims of celebrity abuse over the past 50 years. Many more groupies will come forward after this Rolf Harris trial exposing more recent music and media stars - take that all you big names currently hoping to escape exposure. Justice is moving in one direction. And soon politicians and other social abusers will come into the spotlight. Cabinet ministers are nervous.

I'd imagine celebrities would be more prone to exposure and less likely to get away with any genuine 'abuse' than ordinary folk. There's always been the papers, magazines etc desperate for a story, so eh, why wait 30, 40, 50 years again? Could it be that it was just never that much of a story? That only now are people being invited to re label every peck, kiss or squeeze as 'abuse'? Only now are so many people realising that there is profit to be made in embellishing a past encounter with a celebrity? Or that they are only 'coming forward' with these stories now because they'd never thought of them before because they never actually happened, but some have decided it's a new trend to say you were 'abused' by a 'celebrity'?

anon is probably correct.

Cabinet ministers are nervous is a reference to Chris Spiteful, the odious David Icke who has conned his followers into paying tens of thousands of pounds for a pathetic looking "TV studio" with clapped out equipment so he could webcast his nonsense (others do exactly the same with 100 quid camera and computer) THE "award winning " (self awarded) Cold Potato Films and the bizarre anggirfan whose 7 Degrees of Separation crusade means the entire world has been MKR 'mind controlled' (whatever that means).


the world wide pedo conspiracy where celebs and (mainly Tory) pollies have been protected as they conspire to create the Jewish/ Masonic / Illuminati One World Order (but have so far been a spectacular failure)

it's these pedo hunters we should worry about...they are obsessed with it. Why ?

How many years ago was it Rees-Mogg wrote his 'Who Breaks a Butterfly' editorial? Nearly fifty years? Is there one decent journalist out there now who will at least question how driving a mass of octogenarians to an early grave is what a supposedly decent society should be sitting back and condoning? I like to think there are still some good journalists around but my god they need to make their voices, and consciences, heard.

Anon wrote:
Fair Speak wrote:
I do not suppose this will escape board keeper censors but let's hope that 2014 brings even more justice for victims of celebrity abuse over the past 50 years. Many more groupies will come forward after this Rolf Harris trial exposing more recent music and media stars - take that all you big names currently hoping to escape exposure. Justice is moving in one direction. And soon politicians and other social abusers will come into the spotlight. Cabinet ministers are nervous.

I'd imagine celebrities would be more prone to exposure and less likely to get away with any genuine 'abuse' than ordinary folk. There's always been the papers, magazines etc desperate for a story, so eh, why wait 30, 40, 50 years again? Could it be that it was just never that much of a story? That only now are people being invited to re label every peck, kiss or squeeze as 'abuse'? Only now are so many people realising that there is profit to be made in embellishing a past encounter with a celebrity? Or that they are only 'coming forward' with these stories now because they'd never thought of them before because they never actually happened, but some have decided it's a new trend to say you were 'abused' by a 'celebrity'?

Celebrities also can afford the best lawyers to help them get off. knowone has actually made any money from the abuse claims thus far and it is around 18 months since Operation Yewtree began.

robbiex wrote:
Anon wrote:
Fair Speak wrote:
I do not suppose this will escape board keeper censors but let's hope that 2014 brings even more justice for victims of celebrity abuse over the past 50 years. Many more groupies will come forward after this Rolf Harris trial exposing more recent music and media stars - take that all you big names currently hoping to escape exposure. Justice is moving in one direction. And soon politicians and other social abusers will come into the spotlight. Cabinet ministers are nervous.

I'd imagine celebrities would be more prone to exposure and less likely to get away with any genuine 'abuse' than ordinary folk. There's always been the papers, magazines etc desperate for a story, so eh, why wait 30, 40, 50 years again? Could it be that it was just never that much of a story? That only now are people being invited to re label every peck, kiss or squeeze as 'abuse'? Only now are so many people realising that there is profit to be made in embellishing a past encounter with a celebrity? Or that they are only 'coming forward' with these stories now because they'd never thought of them before because they never actually happened, but some have decided it's a new trend to say you were 'abused' by a 'celebrity'?

Celebrities also can afford the best lawyers to help them get off. knowone has actually made any money from the abuse claims thus far and it is around 18 months since Operation Yewtree began.

The Jimmy Savile thing was about 'compensation' from the very start, see the Panorama programme 'what the BBC knew' and the papers make money by printing stories, Mark Williams Thomas has made a 'career' of it. There was all that bickering over Jimmy Savile's estate (when nothing has been proved) and god knows what other money has changed hands.

Journalists and compensation lawyers have been trawling for complainants from the very start...

So Robbie -it's fair game to drag someone's name through the mud, stop them working or plying on trade and prosecute on hearsay - because they can 'afford' to spunk a quarter of a million on half-decent legal representation and have been well-known?
This is a cancer that is dripping down, like blood. to people who cannot afford the 'luxury' of top class defence - is that ok too?
The UK is an absolutely fucking horrible place now - blood-thirsty, idiotic and hell-bound (perhaps we're already there?)

Chris Retro wrote:
So Robbie -it's fair game to drag someone's name through the mud, stop them working or plying on trade and prosecute on hearsay - because they can 'afford' to spunk a quarter of a million on half-decent legal representation and have been well-known?
This is a cancer that is dripping down, like blood. to people who cannot afford the 'luxury' of top class defence - is that ok too?
The UK is an absolutely fucking horrible place now - blood-thirsty, idiotic and hell-bound (perhaps we're already there?)

No it isn't ok to drag people's name through the mud, however there is just a chance that people like Rolf Harris and Max Clifford may have been guilty of abusing underage girls. All allegations have to be investigated whether you are a celebrity or the local butcher.
As far as stopping them plying their trade, there is nothing to stop them working. Ok the fact that peoples attitudes towards them may have changed based purely on allegations, and thus not go and see them is one of the downsides of being a celebrity. The upside is that they make loads of money and they don't need to work anyway. This isn't just a problem for celebrities. Remember the young man with learning difficulties who got beaten to death because he photographed some young thugs vandalising a wall and thus must be a paedo.

The investigations weren't started because of hearsay, they were started because of specific accusations (possibly false) which must be investigated.

Obviously MWT has made money out of this. People are always going to make shock docs, the masses like scandal, this is why the NOTW was the most popular sunday newspaper for decades.

Yes Robbie - it used to be gossip over garden fences and was just as damaging and nasty and it doesn't make it right. Solution? Questioning NOT arrests; no media coverage until at least charges and probably only after conviction. The crucial part is... publicity provokes false allegations; the bigger the celebrity, the greater the coverage, the more the false allegations. And yes, some may be exaggerations ands some may even be true... but the incentive to lie (or simply be mistaken - memory is unreliable) is massive and crippling.

And how on earth can there be convictions where there is no evidence? It may be unfair to genuine victims but it simply cannot be allowed to continue.

It will stop when politicians, Royals, Editors, police chiefs and judges get accused. Which, I predict, will happen in 2014.

JK2006 wrote:
It will stop when politicians, Royals, Editors, police chiefs and judges get accused. Which, I predict, will happen in 2014.

Just like the Salem witch trials. Either that or it will only stop after some huge and outlandish miscarriages of justice affecting more than just the accused...

Maybe MWT has got some skeletons in the closet, maybe he might admit he might admit his dark past.

robbiex wrote:
Chris Retro wrote:
So Robbie -it's fair game to drag someone's name through the mud, stop them working or plying on trade and prosecute on hearsay - because they can 'afford' to spunk a quarter of a million on half-decent legal representation and have been well-known?
This is a cancer that is dripping down, like blood. to people who cannot afford the 'luxury' of top class defence - is that ok too?
The UK is an absolutely fucking horrible place now - blood-thirsty, idiotic and hell-bound (perhaps we're already there?)

No it isn't ok to drag people's name through the mud, however there is just a chance that people like Rolf Harris and Max Clifford may have been guilty of abusing underage girls. All allegations have to be investigated whether you are a celebrity or the local butcher.
As far as stopping them plying their trade, there is nothing to stop them working. Ok the fact that peoples attitudes towards them may have changed based purely on allegations, and thus not go and see them is one of the downsides of being a celebrity. The upside is that they make loads of money and they don't need to work anyway. This isn't just a problem for celebrities. Remember the young man with learning difficulties who got beaten to death because he photographed some young thugs vandalising a wall and thus must be a paedo.

The investigations weren't started because of hearsay, they were started because of specific accusations (possibly false) which must be investigated.

Obviously MWT has made money out of this. People are always going to make shock docs, the masses like scandal, this is why the NOTW was the most popular sunday newspaper for decades.

Oh dear Robbie,a fool and his remaining brain cells have just been parted

RobbieX wrote

"The investigations weren't started because of hearsay, they were started because of specific accusations (possibly false) which must be investigated.
"

Ah, you never read the Yewtree report then. It specifically states there will be NO investigations. Just quasi-religious absolute belief in the accuser's words.