Quite apart from the morality involved (should the effect on victims play any part in the Judge's sentencing? Surely a crime is a crime and should be sentenced as such?) doesn't ANYBODY assume the victim will inflate and colour up effects for one reason only - to get bigger cash compensation? Should a murderer get longer because his victim's wife is upset than if his victim had no relatives? Should a bank robber get longer if poor people lost savings than if millionaires lost a few hundred?

British Justice is beyond my comprehension. Should a famous person get longer in prison than an uncle who abused his sister's daughter? I'm now so cynical about British Justice (it's a great story).

What will poor old Rolf be feeling now as he sits and waits?

I'm sure the old trooper will be humming (as I was) that great Doris Day hit, Que Sera Sera.

5 & half years. Not as bad as I thought.

Victim impact statements are an atrocious perversion of the legal system.

The charges are The Queen Vs Rolf Harris for the very reason it must be impartial.

It's not Tonya" Show Me The Money' Lee Vs Rolf Harris

First night in jail must feel terrible. There he was this morning, cosseted in his luxury home, and now what?

The effect on the victim is irrelevant. The crime is the same, and should be punished the same. It looks like an excuse to wallow in it.

Perhaps tagging him, and imposing a curfew would have been more appropriate for a person of his age.

Comrade Cosmonaut wrote:
Perhaps tagging him, and imposing a curfew would have been more appropriate for a person of his age.

and a lot cheaper, seen as the nation is supposed to be hard up.

Mr King, you are a self obsessed, narcissistic wanker of the highest order. Thank fuck your corpulent face and whining voice no longer pollute our media.

Must be great to be you A.

Why hijack this thread?

Oh A pops up now and again with a very limited view of "media" - almost 500,000 have now watched the full length Vile Pervert movie.