You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Enter what you see:
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage Tip: Reload page if you have difficulty reading characters
Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Go to bottomPost New TopicPost Reply
TOPIC: And back in 1971
And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
something dreadful and the girl told her father who has since died without ever mentioning it to anyone else...
Oh, please!
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote

Re:And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
Clip with Rolf on Saturday Superstore
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote

Re:And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
Molested does not sound very 1970s 80s touch up was the saying then along with half a dozen other sayings
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote

Re:And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
From the article

Mr Rees told the jury: 'The prosecution suggests that it offends common sense to suggest that these three women, independent of each other, should choose to fabricate stories of a similar nature.

Actually, it offends common sense and everyone's intelligence to suggest that they were independent. These tales can be found in one click through Google and were widely published in the domestic and international news media after his first AND SECOND trials.

Jeeeezus Christ on a fucking bike.
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
Re:And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
And I do hope the defence will point this out again and again and the judge, whoever he may be (could he again be my old QC Nigel Sweeney, now promoted?) will stop the trial as a farce, apologise to the poor man, hope it hasn't ruined the rest of his life - let alone his poor wife's and daughter's and friends and fans lives - and suggests that certain other parties should instead be prosecuted for conspiring to pervert the course of justice and malfeasance in public office. And I hope his defence will insist that the phone calls from "helpful" police or investigators to potential "victims" are played to the jury with all the "might he possibly have been wearing a red tie?" and "could he have been circumcised?" questions recorded for posterity.
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
John Marsh

Re:And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
News report of Miss 1971's brother

"...Vullo said the woman's father and uncle were at the music festival but were now dead and the woman's mother and aunt, who were also there, were unable to give evidence because they suffered from dementia.

But he put it to the woman that she had purposely not told police her brother was also at the festival.

'He is the only member of your family who is able to give evidence.'

Vullo told the woman that she knew her brother was not willing to give a statement to police but if he did he would give evidence that could disprove her account and "that's why you left him out."

'You airbrushed him out of your story from the beginning,' he said.

The woman denied that and said she did not know why she had left her brother out of her accounts..."

Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
John Marsh

Re:And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
Here on this forum JK has noted many of the wrongful tactics employed by police, CPS and others to promote false allegations for all the usual reasons that have nothing to do with justice.

Now third Rolf Harris trial and here is further confirmation from available media reports (noted dm here below):

1. What is reported - some media emphasize the allegations only for sensation. Some media report nothing. Some media report more on the allegations. But little to nothing is raised to the real issues and questions like what did the male friend of Miss 1971 actually say to NSPCC on 20th May as defence QC intimates the initial contact story has changed highlighting verbal recorded evidence to actual collusion. In spite of the constant emphasis of the CPS and prosecution about "no evidence of collusion" in these cases it has always been a prosection statement that tends towards the "perveting the course of justice" side simply because collusion is always possible and because of the nature of the crime that it is not easily detected, UNTIL NOW! Male friend 20th May 2014 reported and acceptance by Miss 1971 that he is/was a close friend (depth of closeness disputed but between friends so what)
2. What is not reported often indicates manipulation by the media as well.
3. Freedom of the press is abused by poor investiagative journalism and sensationalism. So the court system for good reasons and sometimes not for good reasons shuts down trial questioning and reporting the reason given to protect the impartiality of the jury and the influence of the jury. BUT the media must do their job and investigate court cases and procedures that it is NOT a case of control by the court system for "perverting the course of justice". Like if the appeal judges/CPS and government acknowledged the false allegations and miscarriages of justices then they would have to review (And should do so) 1000's 10,000's of cases and I consider the most likely reason any judge or person of powerful position who is able to see the problem does nothing is the enormity of the problem they will be part of unleashing. That will be a real case of this "courage thing" so often talked about.

4. Last point to highlight that is clearly seem in this trial so far is that the police have not investigated, tabulated and clearly set out all the aspects of the cases. And if they did their job it is known from other cases the CPS then ignore the police, accuse them and proceed on nothing.
Here in the three Rolf Harris trials the evidence of poor media reporting and paucity of police investigation can be seen from The Miss Cambridge identity crisis, including location and logistics. Up to now is not set out, apparently (Of course may change further on in this third trial). If there was a murder of a Miss Cambridge all details would of been set out. In the media over three trials three identities have emerged but not systematically put into order etc . 1st Miss Cambridge "catering girl" age increased by three years, location and program changed and did latest Miss Cambridge see the alleged incident? Then BBC Wiltshire, Karen Gardiner waived anonymity said in 1977 (while 1978 event played in the interview clip so can so imply 1977 year was error!) and gave in this case very similar detail to the latest Miss Cambridge, who was aged 16. Previous Miss Cambridge went from aged under 15 plus three years so maybe 17+. Surely this confusion of characters should be clarified. So what is highlighted is basic police work is often not carried out at all. Or not disclosed. And the media does not raise all the unanswered questions.

From Dailymail:

Jurors were also told a male friend of the complainant called the NSPCC on 20 May 2014, to make his own complaint.

Mr Vullo asked whether she alerted him to the fact that she had 'documentary and photographic evidence' to show she had been in the star's company.

'I can't remember that,' she replied, adding: 'I may have done.'

The barrister continued: 'Is it true that [he] had absolutely no details about what you were going to say Mr Harris had done to you?'

Jurors were told she had 'explained what had happened' as early as 2001 or 2002.

But Mr Vullo suggested that 'by 20 May, 2014, he had no idea of any of the details and he had to come back to you afterwards to ask you'.

The woman denied the two were in an 'intimate relationship' at the time they made their respective complaints, describing him to the court as 'my best friend'.

Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
Re:And back in 1971 1 Year, 1 Month ago  
stories of a similar nature? If he had dressed them all in a banana costume and made them lick marmite off his face,THAT would be similar. Not common or garden slight groping.
How many ways can you touch a (side of a) breast or put a hand up a skirt?
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
Go to topPost New TopicPost Reply