Not long before he passed away, the Irish Supreme Court Judge Adrian Hardiman penned this review of Paul Gambaccini's book "Love, Paul Gambaccini"

drb.ie/articles/kafka-on-thames/

It is, I think, a great essay, and worth revisiting.

"This conflict of feeling, which is shared by far more people than Mrs Clinton, has radically undermined the presumption of innocence and has given rise, even in a thoroughly civilised country like Great Britain, to a climate of opinion in which some people, and some institutions, postpone or forsake the idea of bringing an accused person to trial, which carries the possibility of an acquittal, preferring instead to use the powers of the criminal law to subject such people to public shaming so intense that it can destroy their lives. This provides all the stigma of a conviction with none of the risks of a trial. A disproportionate number of the victims of this process are elderly white males. The book under review provides a brilliant account of this process from the point of view of one unlikely victim."

That's a great essay, tdf. Thank you for posting it.

This part in particular caught my eye:

The very worst is that, though he is arrested only for questioning and is never charged, the police immediately leak that fact of his arrest and detention, thereby destroying his career and reputation. He knows they will do this because it had become their practice to do so in other Yewtree arrests (he was the fifteenth person arrested).
I have long suspected that Rolf Harris's name was leaked by Mark Williams-Thomas with the connivance or even at the instigation of the police.

www.kingofhits.co.uk/component/option,co...w/catid,2/id,188492/

Always respect true, not fake, victims. Not least the many millions of true victims of UK fake media - on most issues.

Great review by Late Great Irishman Adrian Hardiman, Justice of the Supreme Court of Ireland - where no 'FAI' nor fake-media exists.

And the enduring UK fake cops/media feeble excuse, "To encourage others to come forward who 'will be believed with credible and true stories' for BIG Compo 'MeTooMoreDough'? FAILS when INNOCENT suspects haven't even been charged.

While long proven 90% of serious child abuses are non-sex serious abuses with millions of non-sex serious child abuse victims (many poverty related) in neo-Dickensian UK. About whom cowardly UK cops/media don't give a damn while pursuing their decades ongoing populist Witchunts Mass Deception deviously masked as so called 'Child Protection'. De-facto a 'Child Protection-Racket' scam, new patriotism last refuge of Virtue-waving COWARDS.

Cowardly UK cops colluding with cowardly UK media for populist careers, Ratings & Profit from their shallow ignorant masses knowing only what they're brainwashed to believe. Can bully a most senior 92yr old War Hero, Field Marshal and former defence Chief of Staff. Then NO ONE in the UK is safe.

"On Friday January 15th, 2016 a ninety-two year old D-Day veteran and former chief of the defence staff, Field Marshal Lord Bramall, also received an apology of sorts from the Metropolitan Police for the appalling hounding he had been subjected to after being involved in a leaked Yewtree inquiry into very old allegations. He too was the subject of a dawn raid on the flat where he lived with his dying wife, conducted by no fewer than twenty police officers, who stayed for seven hours. It is hard to view this as anything but an exercise in throwing the Met’s official weight about and hoping to garner some good publicity. The eventual apology was grudging in the extreme and blamed the media for Lord Bramall’s ordeal. There is, of course, a denial that the police leaked Bramall’s name, a denial believed by absolutely no one, just as in Gambaccini’s case.

It catapults him into an unreal world, a world where a posse of journalists takes up residence outside his apartment building; where the Sun editorially complained that it could not name him (yet); where his relatives abroad, in Europe and the US, are systematically doorstepped; where he enters and leaves his apartment block under a blanket in the back of a car and where he is quite systematically “shunned” by people and organisations from whom he deserves nothing but good and for whom he has done much good in the past."

the Lord Brammal case was an outrage and I believe a few coppers retired to the local pub for lunch where other drinkers were left in no doubt whose house was being raided.

Whole Truth wrote:
Always respect true, not fake, victims. Not least the many millions of true victims of UK fake media - on most issues.

Great review by Late Great Irishman Adrian Hardiman, Justice of the Supreme Court of Ireland - where no 'FAI' nor fake-media exists.



Speaking as an Irish citizen, I don't think i'd go as far to say that FAI/fake media don't exist on this side of the pond, but they are certainly far less virulent than in GB.

See here:

www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-man-j...ars-ago-1504308.html

I do not know if the FSA have any involvement in this particular case, but I have a massive issue with anyone being sentenced for 'crimes' allegedly committed when they were just a child themselves.

Horrifying tdf - not for one second has the Judge admitted the woman could be mistaken, lying, after compensation or revenge or simply deluded. Likewise the jury. It seems beyond the comprehension of most people.

tdf wrote, "www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-man-j...ars-ago-1504308.html

I do not know if the FSA have any involvement in this particular case, but I have a massive issue with anyone being sentenced for 'crimes' allegedly committed when they were just a child themselves."

Not detailed in the report is how recent was the woman's first 'complaint' and to whom?

If not until the last year or two i.e. post-'MeTooMoreDough' then cross-examination might have revealed that her motive was for money not justice?

If she had in fact complained (to her mother?) in the mid to late-'80s but was brushed off as so many were, then such a witnessed recollection now may have rightly swayed the jury and judge.

Though the severity of the assaults may still be exagerrated, as so many are.

Whole Truth wrote:
tdf wrote, "www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-man-j...ars-ago-1504308.html

I do not know if the FSA have any involvement in this particular case, but I have a massive issue with anyone being sentenced for 'crimes' allegedly committed when they were just a child themselves."

Not detailed in the report is how recent was the woman's first 'complaint' and to whom?

If not until the last year or two i.e. post-'MeTooMoreDough' then cross-examination might have revealed that her motive was for money not justice?

If she had in fact complained (to her mother?) in the mid to late-'80s but was brushed off as so many were, then such a witnessed recollection now may have rightly swayed the jury and judge.

Though the severity of the assaults may still be exagerrated, as so many are.

It's possible that there third party witness statements along the lines of "oh yes she did tell me something at the time but I thought it was the vivid imagination of a small child", but the article doesn't mention any.

But I still have an issue with the age of criminal responsibility being set as low as 13 or 14, it doesn't fit well with me somehow.

tdf wrote, "But I still have an issue with the age of criminal responsibility being set as low as 13 or 14, it doesn't fit well with me somehow."

Surely, the long time-lapse and current sentence are the issues, not the ages?

In any era a seven year old forced by a 14yr old is wrong. Indeed coercion/bullying between same-age peers is wrong, while proportionate sanctions are invariably right.

E.G. "Mary, you're only six, but the next time you're caught pulling your little brother's plonker, you'll be barred from playschool for a week."

medium.com/history-of-women/mary-bell-10...ne-knew-f4b10821a84e

Whole Truth wrote:


Surely, the long time-lapse and current sentence are the issues, not the ages?



Why are the time-lapse and sentence the issues WT? Genuine question, it is not obvious to me.

The judge has explicitly set the sentencing very low for multiple rapes of a pre pubescent child. If you check the details they have also suspended some of it; but because of the age of the perpetrator, not the time lapse.

I think the age of the perpetrator (at the time of the crime) is central. The judge has allowed for this.

Whether 14 year olds should recieve prison sentences is another question.

Our age of criminal responsibility in the UK is criminally low, and much lower than most other European countries at 10. Mind you, the proportion of under 18s locked up is vanishingly low.

I am not sure how we should process 14 year olds who rape small children, if honest. They clearly have intent and capacity. My heart wants to do so outside of incarceration; but my head tells me this may be reckless for such serious crimes.

Wyot wrote, "Why are the time-lapse and sentence the issues WT? Genuine question, it is not obvious to me."

We, and maybe the court, still don't know if the girl complained at the time and if not then Wyot, er, why not?

What is well known (not least by JK), is that post-1990s huge publicity about BIG Cash Compo has created the vast and growing FAI. With greedy false claimants 'who will be believed' easily exaggerating and fabricating, incited by bent-cops backed up by fake-media, all for 'MeTooMoreDough' - DOH!

Meaning that what may have been consentual/psuedo consentual 'horsepelay' (yes, young kids following sex-filled 'Family' media, do pro-actively 'play sex' with other kids, older kids, and older folks) has now been made by the woman into forced fumblings and violent 'Rape'. (But no blood on the tracks, er, bed found by Mum?)

Always respect true, not fake, victims.

Whole Truth wrote:
Wyot wrote, "Why are the time-lapse and sentence the issues WT? Genuine question, it is not obvious to me."

We, and maybe the court, still don't know if the girl complained at the time and if not then Wyot, er, why not?



Oh I see.

Well yes, the FAI is one possible explanation if she did not complain at the time and the sentenced is innocent; one among several others. But your "er" shows significant assumptions on your part WT; if I may suggest.

Wyot wrote, "But your "er" shows significant assumptions on your part WT; if I may suggest."

No assumptions nor conclusions intended. Yet, in far too many similar cases there is no evidence only 'she said/he said'.

And in-practise Worldwide almost no lower age limit exists for behavioural sanctions.

Even misbehaving infants are routinely sanctioned by non-corporal scolding, or 'early bedtime', or a mild corporal wrist-slap.

While universally learning by around age seven the historical 'Age of Wisdom' that the time honoured 'Do No Harm/Receive No Harm' encourages mutual empathy and avoids mutual pain. E.G. "Dont pull doggies' tails or they'll turn round and bite you!"

And, no jurisdiction can ever stop Worldwide all age natural pleasure 'Sex'. Whether solo, mutual same-age, same-sex, younger age, older age, or unknown happy humping pup, "Get orf my leg you naturally randy mut!".

Whole Truth wrote:


Even misbehaving infants are routinely sanctioned by non-corporal scolding, or 'early bedtime', or a mild corporal wrist-slap.



Consistent boundary enforcement is key to the healthy psychological development of children. It makes them feel safe and teaches them how to navigate future relationships in a way that is helpful to themselves and others.

Raise a child without boundaries and see what happens...

It won't be pretty!