Randall wrote:
Barry Bennell does indeed seem to have been a serial groper/molester.
STILL trying to minimise his crimes?
He was a serial rapist !

Bennell's crimes were merely said to have occurred by victims.
STILL defending him - after all these trials and all these convictions .... unbelieveable !

there's little indication of who was telling the truth and who was a bandwagoner.
even after the pleas of GUILTY?
even after the numerous convictions?
even after he admitted to police - the video is available online - of how he used to groom young boys?

Jo wrote:
How do you explain this, ITK? A giant conspiracy of silence with children all too scared to tell, grown into adults too scared to report crimes against them, parents who knew too scared to report crimes against their children, bystanders too scared, etc, etc. until all the adults pop up at once decades later?

Why do you think this is so unusual?

Everyone (who knows) will tell you this is quite normal - to suppress the facts and take the blame - UNTIL one person has the courage to come forward, then that emboldens others.

Eg - www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/feb/05/la...tics-prison-sentence

I hope I've not derailed the conversation with my summary of the four trials on the previous page. There's a 1998 Independent article here which states that Bennell 'pleaded guilty to 23 specimen charges'.

ITK, I'm not really that concerned with his guilt. As far as I'm concerned, he's already been caught, stopped and punished. What's happened in the past year or so seems nothing to do with justice.

In The Know wrote:
Randall wrote:
Barry Bennell does indeed seem to have been a serial groper/molester.
STILL trying to minimise his crimes?
He was a serial rapist !

Bennell's crimes were merely said to have occurred by victims.
STILL defending him - after all these trials and all these convictions .... unbelieveable !

there's little indication of who was telling the truth and who was a bandwagoner.
even after the pleas of GUILTY?
even after the numerous convictions?
even after he admitted to police - the video is available online - of how he used to groom young boys?


It's almost like you only read the bits you quoted.

And not the bits discussing guilty pleas and corroborating witnesses, which are in my post in black and white.

I was not aware he was convicted of rape. Wasn't it sexual and indecent assaults, and buggery?

Randall wrote:
I was not aware he was convicted of rape. Wasn't it sexual and indecent assaults, and buggery?

Buggery IS rape ... a child cannot consent.

In The Know (as always !) wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
But he told the police he wasn't abused, and his father says he never stayed at the house and was always picked up. (therefore an accuser is mistaken or lying)

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/919895/gary-sp...r-carol-abuse-claims

To save his embarrassment, maybe?
Would you want to admit (to the world) that you were raped?

Some may say that he had mental illness (the deniers are always looking for a scapegoat - something else to blame) .... but it seems to me highly unlikely that someone could function normally (and very well) in one sphere (he was the manager of Wales !) and have enough problems in other area to kill himself?

Oh but they do. all the time.

In The Know wrote:
Randall wrote:
Barry Bennell does indeed seem to have been a serial groper/molester.
STILL trying to minimise his crimes?
He was a serial rapist !

Bennell's crimes were merely said to have occurred by victims.
STILL defending him - after all these trials and all these convictions .... unbelieveable !

there's little indication of who was telling the truth and who was a bandwagoner.
even after the pleas of GUILTY?
even after the numerous convictions?
even after he admitted to police - the video is available online - of how he used to groom young boys?


But there isn't a video online telling how he used to groom EVERY person who has accused him.


(sorry for the multiple posts. I cant seem to get the hang of quoting more than one at a time 0)

I see that the CPS have stated“Because of the scale of Bennell’s offending, the prosecution faced a number of challenges, including selecting charges which would adequately reflect the scale and seriousness of what Bennell did."
I wonder whether this leaves him open to further prosecution(s) in the future.

ITK, would you accept that this should be his last trial for such offences, as long as he doesn't re-offend?

Randall, this does seem to suggest that he's effectively being tried for what he is, rather than for the individual acts. I'm struggling to see how this time is different from his 1998 trial, where he pleaded guilty to specimin charges. But what concerns me is this business of charges left to 'lie on file' in the 1998 trial. Do you happen to understand this? As far as I can tell, such charges cannot be revisited other than in exceptional circumstances, but can we be sure none of them have been included in the current batch?

Misa wrote:
ITK, would you accept that this should be his last trial for such offences, as long as he doesn't re-offend?

NO - If further offences come to light these are further (untried) offences .... and he should stand trial (unless of course on Monday the Judge does us all a favour and jails him for his natural life).

Any new offences should also face a trial, obviously.

No one should ever have an immunity from prosecution merely because of the enormous scale of their offending.

OK Well I think we've exhausted this topic. Thread closed.