www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08fpd2w/t...l-series-2-episode-1

Paul Nicholas suddenly looking old, after a lifetime of been boyish looking. JK would be a shoe-in for this show, if it wasn't for Surrey Police.

When did Lionel Blair suddenly become nearly 90!?

And I remember when Paul Nicholas was a handsome lad with blond hair. Ah well; we all get older. But Robbie I can assure you - wild horses wouldn't drag me into that show (or any other that wasn't the first - I've got a thing about not going into things after someone else though I did pop up in the relaunch of Juke Box Jury but that was a favour for a friend).
I like being original. Like being the first major celebrity victim of the False Allegations Industry.
Such fun!

robbiex wrote:
JK would be a shoe-in for this show, if it wasn't for Surrey Police.

Its not Surrey police that are preventing it ... its JK's refusal to show that he has learnt his lesson.

Until that happens, there can be no "moving on"

And what lesson is that ITK? Always happy to learn.

JK2006 wrote:
And what lesson is that ITK? Always happy to learn.

Your insistence that no crimes were ever committed.

I wish I had your faith in the judicial system ITK; it would be terribly comforting.

Take, for example, Jeffrey Archer (Mrs ITK bought yet another of his awful books yesterday).

Went to prison - came out - resumed his career, and is again one of our top authors.

Many people have now completely forgotten that he ever went to prison.

Jeffrey Archer one of our top authors!


Keep her off the sherry....

Spee wrote:
Jeffrey Archer one of our top authors!

... and an ex-jailbird !

In The Know wrote:
Spee wrote:
Jeffrey Archer one of our top authors!

... and an ex-jailbird !


Your latter point is correct as everyone knows.

Sadly, he is not a top author by any definition/opinion.

Using the team concept, an idea will be developed in several simultaneous directions - by different team members. An historian, scientist or soldier will combine to produce an end product - a novel.

Much like Dan Brown.

Please inform the sherry drinker(s) ...

In The Know wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
And what lesson is that ITK? Always happy to learn.

Your insistence that no crimes were ever committed.

I am shocked that you could say such a mean thing, Itk.

I am very sure that if Mr King was guilty he would say so (due to him being outstandingly arrogant) and think there was nothing wrong with it.

I suggest you have a look at the Bob Woffingen book. It demonstrates that Mr King, in one case, was not even in the same country as the child in question.

It would be lovely to think that the court is never wrong, but if we refuse to see what is staring us in the face, and miss the opportunity to change it, we might one day find ourselves on the wrong end of the flawed justice system.

It simply isn't good enough that someone can be convicted just on the word of another.
It makes no sense, and we all deserve better than this!

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

I am shocked that you could say such a mean thing, Itk.

Not intended to be mean, honey!

JK keeps going on and on and drawing attention to this.

I'm just suggesting that its time to move on ... and get on with your life.

As Jeffrey Archer (and many others) have done.

Spee wrote:
Jeffrey Archer one of our top authors!


Keep her off the sherry....





Just don't mention razor blades to ITK, Mr Spee.

No offence taken ITK; many feel the same way and suggest, along with expressing remorse, I should find God. Just not my way.

In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

I am shocked that you could say such a mean thing, Itk.

Not intended to be mean, honey!

JK keeps going on and on and drawing attention to this.

I'm just suggesting that its time to move on ... and get on with your life.

As Jeffrey Archer (and many others) have done.

The big difference is that Jeffrey Archer didn't get convicted of sexual offences, in particular child sex offences, which is the big taboo in this country. I don't see Chris Langham moving on with his career, or Gary Glitter returning to the fray after his 1998 offence of looking at dodgy pictures. Instead he went into a rapid decline of moving to different countries with a reputation of child sexual exploitation. Ditto Stuart Hall or DLT.

JK2006 wrote:
And I remember when Paul Nicholas was a handsome lad with blond hair. Ah well; we all get older. But Robbie I can assure you - wild horses wouldn't drag me into that show (or any other that wasn't the first - I've got a thing about not going into things after someone else though I did pop up in the relaunch of Juke Box Jury but that was a favour for a friend).
I like being original. Like being the first major celebrity victim of the False Allegations Industry.
Such fun!

You say that you only do original things, however you have done several cover versions (or as you would probably call them re-imaginings). Also I think Peter Adamson (Len Fairclough from Coronation Street), was accused and acquitted in the early 80s.

Correct Robbie but 1) I consider different interpretations of songs to be originals - not always admittedly but, for example, my version of Hooked On A Feeling was in reality far more original than the BJ Thomas first released version and 2) yes, there have been quite a few celebrity stitch ups in the past including Len Fairclough (as I'm sure he was called in trial, like Ken Barlow!).

robbiex wrote:
In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

I am shocked that you could say such a mean thing, Itk.

Not intended to be mean, honey!

JK keeps going on and on and drawing attention to this.

I'm just suggesting that its time to move on ... and get on with your life.

As Jeffrey Archer (and many others) have done.

The big difference is that Jeffrey Archer didn't get convicted of sexual offences, in particular child sex offences, which is the big taboo in this country. I don't see Chris Langham moving on with his career, or Gary Glitter returning to the fray after his 1998 offence of looking at dodgy pictures. Instead he went into a rapid decline of moving to different countries with a reputation of child sexual exploitation. Ditto Stuart Hall or DLT.

Grantham was known to be a bit of a creep in Cranbrook and other surrounding towns.



So no chance of another Glitter comeback like his flamboyant return in the early 90s' ? (Christ, I'm old. )

andrew wrote:
robbiex wrote:
In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

I am shocked that you could say such a mean thing, Itk.

Not intended to be mean, honey!

JK keeps going on and on and drawing attention to this.

I'm just suggesting that its time to move on ... and get on with your life.

As Jeffrey Archer (and many others) have done.

The big difference is that Jeffrey Archer didn't get convicted of sexual offences, in particular child sex offences, which is the big taboo in this country. I don't see Chris Langham moving on with his career, or Gary Glitter returning to the fray after his 1998 offence of looking at dodgy pictures. Instead he went into a rapid decline of moving to different countries with a reputation of child sexual exploitation. Ditto Stuart Hall or DLT.

Grantham was known to be a bit of a creep in Cranbrook and other surrounding towns.



So no chance of another Glitter comeback like his flamboyant return in the early 90s' ? (Christ, I'm old. )

Anyhow every post doesn't have to descend into a debate on sex offences. The post was really about a programme featuring older celebrities who trial living in a retirement complex in India, similar to the film "The Marigold Hotel".

Does anyone here fancy the idea of waking up to sunshine everyday and living a life of luxury at a fraction of the cost of living in the uk. Would you sacrifice the English lifestyle for sunshine and luxury. Personally it sounds ideal to me except that I don't like Indian food, I find it too stodgy.