Exposure:the Other Side Of Jimmy Savile

[Max Power]

I have always doubted spurious claims by government that things such as this cost the taxpayer huge inflated sums of money. It's nice to be proven correct.

[Lonan3]

A couple of interesting thoughts from Paul McConville's blog (the whole thing is worth a read if you have the time).

 

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/operation-yewtree-the-suns-exclusive-news-re-latest-arrest-which-media-knew-in-march/

 

 

The Daily Mail today headlines its online piece with the statement that Mr Harris has been “outed” as a “historic sex abuse suspect quizzed by Jimmy Savile detectives”. That is factually true. The detectives who have spoken to him are part of Operation Yewtree – the Savile investigation.

But as he is part of the third strand of enquiries, it seems first of all that Mr Harris is not implicated in any of Savile’s actions and secondly, in the absence of any detail about the allegations, there is not the slightest indication that Mr Harris’s alleged offence or offences are of the same nature as those of the deceased DJ.

But, I suspect, from now on people will think ill of Mr Harris in a similar way to that of Savile. Should he, or anyone else, be guilty of similar offences to those committed by Savile, then let the law take its course.

But if he is the victim of a malicious allegation, for example, or the allegation of some seemingly trivial offence which might not even have been viewed as such at the time it is alleged to have occurred, then surely something in the way these matters are being investigated, publicised and reported is wrong. (I do not mean to suggest by the way, that just because some things might have been seen as “acceptable” some years ago, they could not have amounted to a crime. However, even in such areas as these, there is a vast difference in scale between the various offences which can fall under the heading of “sexual abuse”. An accusation, for example, of one drunken grope of an adult many years ago is nowhere near the same level as repeated allegations of violent abuse of the under-age and vulnerable. [Equally, I am not saying that the “drunken grope” is not a criminal offence or that the victim of it might not have suffered as a result, but if, as I have read some commentators say, all sexual abuse is equally bad, then that simply downgrades the seriousness of the most heinous crimes.])

So what happens to Mr Harris and the other “strand three” Yewtree suspects?

What if, in several months, the Crown Prosecution Service announces that there will be no proceedings “due to an insufficiency of evidence”? In the eyes of the law the accused would remain as innocent as they are today, and as they remain, in the eyes of the law, until pronounced guilty by a jury.

In the eyes of many of the public will there not be the thought process as follows regarding any of the accused against whom no proceedings are taken?

• That man was accused of the same crimes as Jimmy Savile (even if there was no similarity at all)
• That man was arrested by the police
• That man has got off because there was not enough evidence
• That means that there was evidence so he has got off through some loophole
• That man is clearly guilty and has got away with it.

It does strike me, as I commented before, that the press ought to be explaining why it chose to publicise some names and not others – it also strikes me that any of the accused who are innocent have been damaged beyond repair already by the coverage. It also strikes me that the police ought to be explaining why the “third strand” enquiries have been so closely linked to the Savile offences, even where the only connection is that coverage of his crimes prompted the accuser to come forward.

[CrossRoss]

Like a sacrificial christian thrown to the lions, Rolf Harris is ruined to divert public attention away from the real culprits.

 

Remember the head copper resigned in a hurry quite recently.

[thommo2010]

Now Ken Barlow has been lifted

[Tempus Fugit]

is this the the fallout of the permissive 60s or just a money-grabbing bandwagon ?

[Ron Burgandy]

Now Ken Barlow has been lifted

 

Deidre is gonna go mental.

[Lonan3]

Who?

[wrighty]

Now Ken Barlow has been lifted

 

Am I the only one to think this is going mad? In 1967, aged about 35, he allegedly raped a 15 year old, who now aged 61 or thereabouts decides to complain about it.

[quilp]

 

 

Now Ken Barlow has been lifted

Am I the only one to think this is going mad? In 1967, aged about 35, he allegedly raped a 15 year old, who now aged 61 or thereabouts decides to complain about it.

No, Mr Wright, you're not the only one but look at it this way....

Say you were 15 and someone had raped you. At the time, barely anyone took notice, let alone the police and even though you'd been injured internally and had been defiled, the perpetrator walked away from his crime and carried on his life as if nothing had happened.

Your pain and resentment would last a lifetime and it wouldn't really matter about any passage of time if the opportunity arose to bring your rapist to judgment. You'd go for it, i'd bet.

Years ago, the claims of children usually fell on deaf-ears when someone was accused of a crime such as this; the law seemed to err on the side of the alleged offender resulting in horror for the victim.

Now, the opposite seems true and not before time.

I have a friend who, as an 8 year old boy, went through all this. He was buggered (raped) for months and was disbelieved when he finally plucked-up the courage to complain, even when clinical evidence proved he'd been violated. Some 30-odd years later, he was approached by the police and asked to give a statement pertaining to his experience, against a manager at the care home where the rapes took place, as 17 other people, all children at the time had come forward to tell their story. My friend refused but justice was borne-out and the bastard who'd potentially ruined some lives was finally gaoled for his crimes.

The injustice and events of the time have never left my mate but he is heartened by the change in attitudes towards this sort of crime.

So try'n see it from this standpoint instead of being concerned by your own incredulity.

All this happened on the Island, by the way....

[woolley]

 

Now Ken Barlow has been lifted

 

Am I the only one to think this is going mad? In 1967, aged about 35, he allegedly raped a 15 year old, who now aged 61 or thereabouts decides to complain about it.

 

Totally agree. There should be a statute of time limitation on these things. I don't doubt that some of the cases are genuine but it is just inviting nutters and attention seekers to crawl out and have a go at anyone who is there to be shot at. If they are famous and have a few bob so much the better.

[Lonan3]

Now I see who you're talking about - an actor called Bill Roache who apparently plays someone called Ken Barlow - any chance that one or two of you could try to separate real life from fucking soap operas?

[prism10]

I am very willing to differentiate between systematic abuse that took place in children's homes, churches etc in the 60s, 70s and 80s and seemingly an impressionable teenage girl who got carried away with a tv star.

 

Without knowing the full facts over the Roache incident, the police are going to come a cropper where a jury will just decide that the nice Mr Rolf Harris or Mr Roache could not possibly done such a deed and the only reason they are complaining almost 50 years later is to make money.

 

Now why no action against 60s pop stars, Sir Mick Jagger, Sir Paul McCartney and many others, you telling me some of them ladies were in fact just 14 or 15. One person who should be taken in to police questioning is a certain bass player from the Stones.

[Max Power]

There was no such thing as DNA evidence in the 60's so it would have been nigh on impossible for convictions in certain cases. I can't see how there can be a conviction beyond reasonable doubt after 40 or more years?

If there was no complaint at the time, I can't see how a single case of rape or indecent assault can be proven against the likes of Rolf Harris or Bill Roache? If they were serial offenders and there were consistent witnesses then that would be a different matter.

[DRIVER]

 

Now Ken Barlow has been lifted

 

Deidre is gonna go mental.

He was lucky to get back in the house after that bird on the barge.

bet he goes to Germany to see Kevins dad and they are killed in a car crash !

[prism10]

 

 

Now Ken Barlow has been lifted

 

Deidre is gonna go mental.

He was lucky to get back in the house after that bird on the barge.

bet he goes to Germany to see Kevins dad and they are killed in a car crash !

Len Fairclough died in a motorway accident!