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.
He was sentenced to five years and nine months in prison following a string of sick sex attacks on young girls.
How many more times do they need to be told? There were no young girls! Well, there was one young girl but her story was a crock of sh*t and his conviction was overturned in November 2017.
The Manchester Evening News still has this erroneous headline:
The youngest victim of Rolf Harris has died - she was seven when he attacked her at a children's disco
'I'm not saying he's got blood on his hands or suppose he cares one jot about her passing but he should be aware of the grim legacy he left her to cope with'
He didn't attack her. He never even met the woman. There was no grim legacy. I can't get my head around how 'journalists' get away with this sort of thing.
Sheba Bear wrote:
He was sentenced to five years and nine months in prison following a string of sick sex attacks on young girls.
How many more times do they need to be told? There were no young girls! Well, there was one young girl but her story was a crock of sh*t and his conviction was overturned in November 2017.
The Manchester Evening News still has this erroneous headline:
The youngest victim of Rolf Harris has died - she was seven when he attacked her at a children's disco
'I'm not saying he's got blood on his hands or suppose he cares one jot about her passing but he should be aware of the grim legacy he left her to cope with'
He didn't attack her. He never even met the woman. There was no grim legacy. I can't get my head around how 'journalists' get away with this sort of thing.
That's outrageous. I see that that quote is from her brother, Paul Wild, the same person who said he had kept his sister's childhood photo in case it might one day prove "useful" (very odd reason for keeping a loved one's photo, IMO), saying he was going to send it to Rolf (source). If you really believed someone was a paedophile who had abused your sister why on earth would you give them the "pleasure" of a photo of her as a child?!
md wrote: Belfast Live is owned by Reach plc who earlier this year renewed its commitment to an anti-fake news scheme called "The Trust Project". What a joke.
To get these momentous photos of an elderly man using a walking stick there must either be paparazzi following him, or a member of the public has taken the photos and sold them to the press.
The comments are being moderated in advance, as they always are for anything to do with Rolf Harris. Most of the supportive comments won't be published or will be held back until interest in the article has waned.
These dingbats really believe that he abused little children. Some of the comments are appalling.
Interestingly, she smiles when she recalls seeing Rolf on TV with his wobble board, and "little ditties", etc. There even seems to be a hint of a smile when she says she had "an all-day groping experience with a man who couldn't keep his hands off me". She also claims women in 1986 were expected to accept this kind of behaviour and not slap a hand a way, says that it wasn't acceptable for women to stand up for themselves back then. Seems like complete nonsense to me. 1986 was well past the 1970s feminist movement.
Interestingly, she smiles when she recalls seeing Rolf on TV with his wobble board, and "little ditties", etc. There even seems to be a hint of a smile when she says she had "an all-day groping experience with a man who couldn't keep his hands off me". She also claims women in 1986 were expected to accept this kind of behaviour and not slap a hand a way, says that it wasn't acceptable for women to stand up for themselves back then. Seems like complete nonsense to me. 1986 was well past the 1970s feminist movement.
On Facebook she says her mother was a narcissist…
I dont remember ever being expected to put up with groping.
Surely if you dont stop someone groping you once, twice, or twenty-four times it is giving them permission?
I just can't understand what the media want from the likes of Rolf. Do they resent the fact that he's still alive? It seems like it. Old man goes for a walk, old man has a stick, old man pictured smiling - why are they so angry? Even if the conviction was sound, he's served his time, so what else do they want? It's a bit like the attitude to Woody Allen: he's not been charged with anything and he still refuses to admit any guilt? And he's still working??? How dare he? I wish someone would challenge them to explain what they actually want from, or of, these people they pester.
Strongly bias judge used this testimony to hide his hints in summing up as it was obviously nonsense
From "Rolf Harris Why I Believe He Is Innocent" (Kindle ).
SW6 age 24 Australia Make Up Artist 1986 RH brother and manager were also in the room. Alleged standing next to the chair looking at his face when RH's right hand slid up her left leg and under her shorts. Groped more than two dozen times nicknamed "The Octopus" because of his wandering hands. Analysis of SW6 testimony Mainly in Australia but some in the UK are show biz crowd cashing in. I find these people distasteful. Simple on this one why would any person in the commanding position of make up artist where the recipient is meant to sit still stand for this nonsense. They are in control and all powerful. why did she not stand back and say "any more of that and I will walk out." Remember the show must go on and everyone knows it. So temperamental make artists can not be mucked about with or not for long. Even the judge said not to take too much notice of this one. The judge was bias and this was his chance to name the so obvious liar to smokescreen his other antics. Besides the prosecution loved "the octopus" label and "wandering hands" and that is the only reason this witness was included nothing to do with been a witness to a crime. This witness was included due to the Mr Hyde side, dark side of the prosecutor and judge. So they could convict an innocent man and they knew it and planned it.
Rick wrote: I just can't understand what the media want from the likes of Rolf. Do they resent the fact that he's still alive? It seems like it. Old man goes for a walk, old man has a stick, old man pictured smiling - why are they so angry? Even if the conviction was sound, he's served his time, so what else do they want? It's a bit like the attitude to Woody Allen: he's not been charged with anything and he still refuses to admit any guilt? And he's still working??? How dare he? I wish someone would challenge them to explain what they actually want from, or of, these people they pester.
wjlmarsh, that certainly blows a hole in her claim of being the strongest witness for the prosecution.
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote: I dont remember ever being expected to put up with groping.
Surely if you dont stop someone groping you once, twice, or twenty-four times it is giving them permission?
She certainly seems pretty feisty today and from the photos doesn't look shy in her younger days either. Even if you felt intimidated by a celeb, I just can't see how you would be able to count distinct gropes in practice, let alone quietly put up with them so that you could methodically build a tally and such a considerable one at that. And if you had formed a positive impression of a celeb on TV that was dashed by a negative personal experience of them so serious that you went to court about it as a victim of crime would you really later recall that celeb's TV performances with a smile on your face?
On her Facebook account ("Speaker, MC and Interview Coach. The first Mrs Earth Australia 2017 Mrs Role Model of the Year 2018"), she's loving her press attention:
Forums 
