news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6984082.stm

I don't really know about the facts of the case,but being a fan it's a sad day for music.

I notice the BBC featured some of his music this morning. I guess they believe murder isn't that bad a crime, unlike looking at photographs on a computer.

Strange that !!

If you look at dirty photos then the BBC ban you from the airwaves but if you kill someone then that is ok.

The BBC have a very strange set of rules and a moral code that says killing is OK.

Reminds me of the words of an ex member of The Glitter Band after gary Glitter had been convicted of posessing indecent images. He said that if he had committed murder the public could have forgiven him, but nobody can ever forgive him for what's he's done.

That really amazed me. Do we actually believe that posessing images, no matter how explicit, can be worse than taking somebody's life?

Obviously some people do - which means that they don't value life that highly.

there is a facsinating documentary about Vanity Fair writer Dominique Dunne who was covering the first Spector trial as the doco was being made. Rent it if you can.

Dunne, who's daughter was brutely murdered always takes the side of the "vicim" and against the alleged murderer..sometimes he get's it wrong..but he does get amazing inside information that other crime writers just miss even when it's under their nose.

Can't wait to read his take on this. By all acounts.Phil Spector whilst being a brilliant producer was also gun crazy and pretty dangerous.

Yeah he did the kill

yeah his name is Phil

and then he went to jail

he did wrong wrong wrong he did wrong wrong

Al wrote:


That really amazed me. Do we actually believe that posessing images, no matter how explicit, can be worse than taking somebody's life?

Obviously some people do - which means that they don't value life that highly.

That would depend on the content wouldn't it? Images can involve torture or even murder. Suffering for the sake of someone elses pleasure is a crime If you choose to view aren't you an accessory?

Put down that Agatha Christie novel Angel, you accessory to murder you.

Or, of course, if you prefer reality you can always read the News of the World.

Pleasure? Whoa!

Lovely retort. Made me smile.

JK made a valid point though, Angel. If looking at an image of someone who's been stripped naked or raped makes you an accessory to the offence, then surely looking at an image or video of someone who's been murdered also makes you an accessory. Same with reading about such things.

If Glitter looked at an image of an abused child, that child still has the opportunity to put the abuse behind them and live some sort of life. But if Glitter had killed someone then they no longer have that opportunity to live any kind of life. Thus, killing someone must be worse. So why are people suggesting that looking at images is worse than committing murder?