False Allegations against the rich and famous - started 20 years ago in the UK with JK in 2000 - a delicious scandal which I predicted would become an epidemic; it doesn't have to be true; these days an allegation is enough. Many manage to escape (like Trump). Most are dead so compensation can be claimed (like Michael Jackson and Jimmy Savile). What still astonishes me is how Boris Johnson is still running for PM.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/j...ats-go-down-so-be-it

"It's working with Epstein; it worked with Bill Cosby; it should work with Spacey; let's try it with R Kelly".

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7239511...ficking-charges.html

Many, many times over, we have seen prominent conservative figures accused of sexual harassment or assault, only to have the most prominent figures on the right just deny it.

Oh, how dare they.

Women who accuse liberal* men of wrongdoing, the thinking seems to be, are to be believed. Women who accuse right-wing men are liars.

Yes, because conservatives want to keep the presumption of innocence and Leftists want to get rid of it.



* Note the old communist sleight of hand trick, switching vocabulary. These hardcore Marxists are nothing like anything we would call a Liberal. People's Democratic Republic, The Great Leap Forward... just call your unpalatable truths by a different name and hope people won't notice.

We don't know whether the allegations are false. Apparently there is a dvd showing R. Kelly abusing a 14 year old girl which has been given to the jury. False allegations do exist, Gambo, Cliff, Saville (some of it at least), Tarbuck, but Kelly's allegations are more recent, with dvd evidence. He's going to need very good lawyers to get out of this one.

We'll have this discussion until one or both meets our maker Robbie but I repeat; the presumption of innocence means ALL allegations must be considered false until, unless (and possibly even after) they are declared true in a court of law.

JK2006 wrote:
We'll have this discussion until one or both meets our maker Robbie but I repeat; the presumption of innocence means ALL allegations must be considered false until, unless (and possibly even after) they are declared true in a court of law.

I think you can assume innocence all round until proven otherwise.

We dont want to assume people are rapists, but no need to call accusers liars either.

robbiex wrote:
Apparently there is a dvd showing R. Kelly abusing a 14 year old girl which has been given to the jury.

Is she 14 in the video? Did R Kelly know she was 14?

To answer yes to both questions, beyond a reasonable doubt, we'd need more evidence than someone simply asserting that's it's so.

Otherwise why bother with a trial?

The Epstein thing is odd but this is the era of Witch Hunts so par for the course.

Of course the girls in question are not children and in most of Europe would be legal age.

We can be so puritanical it may be time for everyone to give up sex (I did years ago)or perhaps hurry up and build our sex robots.

But they are cracking down on that as well with importers of "child" robots being busted.
I would have thought, no matter how distasteful you find it..someone having it off with a lump of silicone is far better than a real live child.

My feeling on Epstein: much of the accusations will fall apart (it will take a few years as well)..and there are credible rumblings that Epstein is also a "CIA assett" which is why he got off fairly lightly in the past.