www.itv.com/watch/glitter-the-popstar-pa...10a4743/10a4743a0001

There is nothing much new in this documentary, other than a couple of new interviews. One with forgotten tv presenter Iain Lee who was a fan, but didn't know Glitter and another from a photographer who photographed him talking to Kids in Cuba in 1997.

Its a bit worrying to hear that the commentators in this show seem to think that once someone is convicted of a sexual offence, then they should never be free again, and its ok to harass them for the rest of their lives. This treatment is hardly going to help to rehabilitate them.

The documentary concludes that suspect comments made by Glitter on tv regarding children are clues to his sexual interest in children. You could probably find comments made about teen girls from many different celebrities of the time. It was just regarded as normal banter at the time.

I agree in some ways with you.

The documentary is pretty much a copy and paste from documentaries on on Channel 4 and the BBC are decades old. I have never heard of Iain Lee, he added nothing to the program or even an antidote.
The paparazzi photographer should of focused on nonces who were at it again or getting released too soon. Glitter going shopping is not a crime. People need to notice that GG didn't really write anything Mike Leander did it all.

Sure Glitter is a filthy bastard.

People never mention that Led Zeppelin loved underage girls.

Green Man wrote:
I agree in some ways with you.

The documentary is pretty much a copy and paste from documentaries on on Channel 4 and the BBC are decades old. I have never heard of Iain Lee, he added nothing to the program or even an antidote.
The paparazzi photographer should of focused on nonces who were at it again or getting released too soon. Glitter going shopping is not a crime. People need to notice that GG didn't really write anything Mike Leander did it all.

Sure Glitter is a filthy bastard.

People never mention that Led Zeppelin loved underage girls.

A young man taking advantage of a fifteen year old, horrible as it may be, is not the same as raping an eight year old.

Honey wrote:
[quote]Green Man wrote:


A young man taking advantage of a fifteen year old, horrible as it may be, is not the same as raping an eight year old.

Quite agree with you Honey. It is why I don't post about people like Glitter. His case is nothing to do with changing social norms or hypocrisy. It is the rape of pre pubescent children. An absolute moral abomination or evil - depending on your world outlook.

Bill Wyman should of been locked up for the same thing. I do like Tales From The Jails.

Not forgetting PJ Proby.

The only difference is that I have no idea whether GG raped anyone, let alone small children. I only have the legal and media systems to inform me and I trust neither.

JK2006 wrote:
The only difference is that I have no idea whether GG raped anyone, let alone small children. I only have the legal and media systems to inform me and I trust neither.

This is why I wrote that his case is about moral abomination or evil, rather than Glitter himself. Others like to opine about society and hypocrisy in his case. But if he isguilty of raping 8 year olds, I don't agree that such comparisons are in any way relevant. Your case (what you remain convicted of anyway) does for me very much raise questions about society and hypocrisy.

Honey wrote:
Green Man wrote:
I agree in some ways with you.

The documentary is pretty much a copy and paste from documentaries on on Channel 4 and the BBC are decades old. I have never heard of Iain Lee, he added nothing to the program or even an antidote.
The paparazzi photographer should of focused on nonces who were at it again or getting released too soon. Glitter going shopping is not a crime. People need to notice that GG didn't really write anything Mike Leander did it all.

Sure Glitter is a filthy bastard.

People never mention that Led Zeppelin loved underage girls.

A young man taking athindvantage of a fifteen year old, horrible as it may be, is not the same as raping an eight year old.

Well actally it was an attempted rape that he was convicted for. I don't think that anyone thinks that this is anything but appalling. Its just a case of whether it was actually true or not or someone after compensation. How safe can a conviction be 30 years after the alleged event.

I didn't realise that the court case against this woman who claimed she was the victim of an attempted rape occurred 1 year before he got nicked for having dodgy pictures on his computer. This makes it even more stupid that he took his computer to be fixed at PC World with the pictures still on the computer.

robbiex wrote:
Honey wrote:
Green Man wrote:
I agree in some ways with you.

The documentary is pretty much a copy and paste from documentaries on on Channel 4 and the BBC are decades old. I have never heard of Iain Lee, he added nothing to the program or even an antidote.
The paparazzi photographer should of focused on nonces who were at it again or getting released too soon. Glitter going shopping is not a crime. People need to notice that GG didn't really write anything Mike Leander did it all.

Sure Glitter is a filthy bastard.

People never mention that Led Zeppelin loved underage girls.

A young man taking athindvantage of a fifteen year old, horrible as it may be, is not the same as raping an eight year old.

Well actally it was an attempted rape that he was convicted for. I don't think that anyone thinks that this is anything but appalling. Its just a case of whether it was actually true or not or someone after compensation. How safe can a conviction be 30 years after the alleged event.

I didn't realise that the court case against this woman who claimed she was the victim of an attempted rape occurred 1 year before he got nicked for having dodgy pictures on his computer. This makes it even more stupid that he took his computer to be fixed at PC World with the pictures still on the computer.

There is no doubt in the world that he is a nonce. Having photos of obscene material of kids deserves a very lenghty jail tail time, which he is doing.

ITV did a very a lazy job on the documentary, I thought there be interviews from people who knew or his family. Not footage taking from Channel 4 and BBC which is on Youtube.

Re-naming all the usual few 'suspect' stars is just boring old TV and tabloid mob cowardice for brain-dead bullies and clickbait bums.

Of the many Stars since the early Rock-Pop 'Sex Objects' Presley, Beatles, Stones etc, ask how many more had thousands of cock-crazed underage fans as young as nine chasing them for 'Trophy Sex'? Quote 'Love Magnet' BIG Chuck, 1957, "Nine years old and sweet as she can be..and fifteen hundred waiting outside the door."

The answer is far more than the convenient few 'star victims' now falsely smeared by dirty-minded tabloid bullies and Web morons, who were never backstage or in hotel rooms; and who would have been flattened trying to stop swarms of shameless young girls. Some also throwing their panties onstage with phone-numbers and names. (You get the message?)

Paraphrase, sarcastic sex-object Lennon: "What do I think about screaming hordes of young girls chasing us everywhere and into hotels? I think it's terrible, it's like Satyricon." (Ancient Roman orgies).

I've been assured by people who knew Mike Leander well that Gary Glitter had absolutely no creative input into the songs, yet Mike gave Gary half of the writers' royalties. I've never quite understood that.

Sweet Tits wrote:
Re-naming all the usual few 'suspect' stars is just boring old TV and tabloid mob cowardice for brain-dead bullies and clickbait bums.

Of the many Stars since the early Rock-Pop 'Sex Objects' Presley, Beatles, Stones etc, ask how many more had thousands of cock-crazed underage fans as young as nine chasing them for 'Trophy Sex'? Quote 'Love Magnet' BIG Chuck, 1957, "Nine years old and sweet as she can be..and fifteen hundred waiting outside the door."

The answer is far more than the convenient few 'star victims' now falsely smeared by dirty-minded tabloid bullies and Web morons, who were never backstage or in hotel rooms; and who would have been flattened trying to stop swarms of shameless young girls. Some also throwing their panties onstage with phone-numbers and names. (You get the message?)

Paraphrase, sarcastic sex-object Lennon: "What do I think about screaming hordes of young girls chasing us everywhere and into hotels? I think it's terrible, it's like Satyricon." (Ancient Roman orgies).

Chuck Berry was into all kind of perverted, voyeurism and other sick shit. I think he only did time for tax evasion.

I think the Rollers or Monkees said same sort of thing that Lennon said. I am paraphrasing but they said they used to prentend to fast and then slow down so they could be grabbed.

One thing that did not make sense in the Glitter doc was that secruity were carrying boxes from the van to his dressing room. One box fell to the floor and opened which had filthy photos. Was Glitter moving house between concerts?

Oddly enough Pete Townshend was giving 24 hours by the police before he was questioned by the fuzz.

I don't want to go off on a tangentc, but Tam Paton kept the rollers on a tight leash, making them share rooms and ban alcohol. Some of the rollers weren't much older than their fans. Woody was 16, Les was 17, and the young irish replacement for Alan looked about 15. I think they were in more danger from Tam, than they were to their fans. The documentary would have been more insightfull if they had an interview with his daughter. Surely the girl who was molested would have mentioned this to his daughter. Also the photos that dropped out of the box were of young girls, but they didn"t say that they were nude. I think that Gadd should be let out of prison now. He is 80 and has served 9 years for something that happened 50 years ago. If he wasn't famous, he would have been let out already. He remains behind bars to satisfy the nation's bloodlust.

Barry Titter wrote:
I've been assured by people who knew Mike Leander well that Gary Glitter had absolutely no creative input into the songs, yet Mike gave Gary half of the writers' royalties. I've never quite understood that.

Because without Gary Glitter to present his work, Mike Leander would have the entire royalties to zilch, all by himself.

Green Man wrote, "Chuck Berry was into all kind of perverted, voyeurism and other sick shit. I think he only did time for tax evasion."

Prior to his rise to fame, during a trip to Kansas City with a group of friends, in 1944, he participated in an armed robbery for which he was sentenced to 10 years in prison. Berry fulfilled three years of sentencing in the juvenile reformatory of Algoa, a place where he formed a singing group and dedicated himself to boxing. His was to challenge life to blows of danger and chaos.

steemit.com/music/@doctop/the-day-that-c...a-mexican-prostitute

“And Janice, how old are you?” the US Attorney asked Janice Escalanti, at the start of Chuck Berry’s trial. “Fourteen years old,” she said, quietly. It was her quietness that first appealed to Berry in December 1959.

jprobinson.medium.com/the-trial-of-chuck-berry-d016ec3c0175

I haven't followed Chuck Berry to be honest with you Sweet Tits. Around 1990, I was with a friend and we got speaking to a couple at the venue, the couple owned a little club New Club near Louie's Rock City.

My friend mentioned Chuck Berry, because he saw a battered 8x10 with pin holes of Chuck on the club wall. (It seemed that Chuck Berry pissed off a lot venue managers in NY).

Then guy mood changed, he went on about Chuck failed to fulfill at his club and that Chuck kept chatting the guy's wife or gropping her and other people's girlfriends. Even the poor guys wife explained to us what he tried to do with her.


On another note Robbie, I thought Les much older than that in the Rollers. He looked about late 20s or early 30s. Yes if Glitter was Joe Public he would of been released years ago, those who were part of Plymouth peado ring which was all women and one bloke. All the women did prison time and got released the bloke is still inside.

Barry Titter wrote:
I've been assured by people who knew Mike Leander well that Gary Glitter had absolutely no creative input into the songs, yet Mike gave Gary half of the writers' royalties. I've never quite understood that.

Mike Leander, wrote and played everything on the records apart from the sax.

Glitter, was a great showman but Gadd is a very sick human being.

Green Man wrote:


Yes if Glitter was Joe Public he would of been released years ago, those who were part of Plymouth peado ring which was all women and one bloke. All the women did prison time and got released the bloke is still inside.

The bloke may not have received a determinate sentence (and so needs to convince a parole board to release him). He may have been deemed more culpable than the women and received a longer sentence, or been released and then recalled through poor behaviour.

Glitter recieved a determinate sentence (16 years) and like every recipient of a determinate sentence in the UK was released at the half way point. He has been treated exactly the same as any other prisoner.

He then apparently breached the terms of his licence and was recalled to prison, as every serving prisoner in the UK on licence can be.

Anyone who spends more than 1 day sentenced to custody is on some kind of licence now, so again no exceptions for Gadd.

We can't know the details of why he was recalled; as with any serving prisoner in the UK.

Green Man wrote:
I haven't followed Chuck Berry to be honest with you Sweet Tits. Around 1990, I was with a friend and we got speaking to a couple at the venue, the couple owned a little club New Club near Louie's Rock City.

My friend mentioned Chuck Berry, because he saw a battered 8x10 with pin holes of Chuck on the club wall. (It seemed that Chuck Berry pissed off a lot venue managers in NY).

Then guy mood changed, he went on about Chuck failed to fulfill at his club and that Chuck kept chatting the guy's wife or gropping her and other people's girlfriends. Even the poor guys wife explained to us what he tried to do with her.


On another note Robbie, I thought Les much older than that in the Rollers. He looked about late 20s or early 30s. Yes if Glitter was Joe Public he would of been released years ago, those who were part of Plymouth peado ring which was all women and one bloke. All the women did prison time and got released the bloke is still inside.

Mckeweon was born in November 1955 and joined the rollers in November 1973, making him 17. I don't think that 9 year olds ever attended pop concerts unattended, if at all.

I remember listening to Glitter on Desert Island Discs, he was saying that after Rock n Roll part 2 became a big hit then he wouldn't put more than "Hey Hey" in the lyrics, implying that they were his lyrics, minimal as they were. Songwriters and artists often negotiate the royalties. The spice girls have writing credits on all their hits, but I don't think they did much song writing. Also all of U2 share the song writing credits, but Bono writes all the songs.

Wyot wrote:
Green Man wrote:


Yes if Glitter was Joe Public he would of been released years ago, those who were part of Plymouth peado ring which was all women and one bloke. All the women did prison time and got released the bloke is still inside.

The bloke may not have received a determinate sentence (and so needs to convince a parole board to release him). He may have been deemed more culpable than the women and received a longer sentence, or been released and then recalled through poor behaviour.

Glitter recieved a determinate sentence (16 years) and like every recipient of a determinate sentence in the UK was released at the half way point. He has been treated exactly the same as any other prisoner.

He then apparently breached the terms of his licence and was recalled to prison, as every serving prisoner in the UK on licence can be.

Anyone who spends more than 1 day sentenced to custody is on some kind of licence now, so again no exceptions for Gadd.

We can't know the details of why he was recalled; as with any serving prisoner in the UK.

I have a feeling he blew his licence on purpose. The media would hound everyday and not forgetting the public. The press and Youtube influcencers were outside the hostel almost every day, with drones also. The photo of him with the smartphone looks very staged.

In the documentary the paparazzi guy admitted he didn't leave Gadd alone.