Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Operation Yewtree
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
hunckOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 13 Jul 2011
Total posts: 169
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 02-05-2014 14:29    Post subject: Reply with quote

Couldn't have happened to a more deserving piece of shit. And that's being polite.
Back to top
View user's profile 
gncxxOffline
King-Size Canary
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Total posts: 13120
Location: Eh?
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 06-05-2014 21:47    Post subject: Reply with quote

Suppose we'd better mention this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27294888

Quote:
Entertainer Freddie Starr will not be prosecuted over sex offence allegations because of "insufficient evidence" on most claims, prosecutors have said.

The Crown Prosecution Service said there was "a realistic prospect of conviction" in one case but it was not in the public interest to prosecute.

Mr Starr has been on bail since being arrested by Operation Yewtree officers.

Mr Starr's lawyer accused police of a "flagrant breach" of his client's human rights due to delays in the case.

Mr Starr, 71, was first questioned in November 2012, and has always denied any wrongdoing...


Wonder if he'll sue?
Back to top
View user's profile 
drbatesOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Total posts: 527
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 07-05-2014 19:56    Post subject: Reply with quote

How does this work?

The crimes were decades ago - there can't be any evidence, or presumably any reliable witnesses.

How do you try something like that and how does the defendant defend themselves?

I just can't envisage how either side would even start to put a case/defence together.
Back to top
View user's profile 
MythopoeikaOffline
Joined: 18 Sep 2001
Total posts: 9706
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 07-05-2014 20:16    Post subject: Reply with quote

drbates wrote:
How does this work?

The crimes were decades ago - there can't be any evidence, or presumably any reliable witnesses.

How do you try something like that and how does the defendant defend themselves?

I just can't envisage how either side would even start to put a case/defence together.


There have been a lot of these cases lately. How they've found any evidence I have no idea.
Back to top
View user's profile 
pornosonic1975Offline
Yeti
Joined: 31 Aug 2009
Total posts: 79
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-05-2014 08:13    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've not read the entire thread as it's too long, so my apologies if this has been posted earlier.

My theory is that these minor celebrities have been exposed as deviants as a result of the Savile scandal in order to act as as a smokescreen, in that all these allegations are an ideal way to attract attention away from Savile and all the politicians and persons in the establishment whom he had very close associations with. I mean, other than Stuart Hall's admissions (I think he has been VERY poorly advised by his legal team) and one or two people from care homes with dubious credibility - what evidence do we have? How do we know that the anonymous accusers haven't simply been induced to lie by persons unknown?

Exactly HOW do you prove these allegations beyond all reasonable doubt?

We certainly aren't hearing about Mr Savile and his provably extensive 'connections' anymore are we?
Back to top
View user's profile 
FelixAntoniusOffline
Outsider.
Joined: 07 Aug 2001
Total posts: 1055
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-05-2014 10:15    Post subject: Reply with quote

drbates wrote:
How does this work?

The crimes were decades ago - there can't be any evidence, or presumably any reliable witnesses.

How do you try something like that and how does the defendant defend themselves?

I just can't envisage how either side would even start to put a case/defence together.


It puzzles me as well.

The two cases I attempted to follow i.e. Dave Lee Travis & Max Clifford, seem to have had a long list of people making accusations, individually, each case prosecuted seemed to be quite thin & probably would have not stood on their own. But they were put through one after the other, seemingly hoping that they would provide substance to the other accusations. Or maybe in the hope that something would stick.

Tucked in with the main prosecutions, seems to have been other witnesses, who made similar claims, but which were not resulting in a prosecution. Again, giving a substance to the main cases being prosecuted.

The similarity of the witness statements proving the truth of the prosecutions case.

There have been however cases where the witnesses have been interviewed & have picked up clues as to what they are expected to say, possibly, with the hope that they can then sue for compensation!

OR! They are simply telling the truth, to the best of their ability. Don't forget the female students to certain university's, who in the last few days are suggesting sexual impropriety from their fellow students.
Back to top
View user's profile 
gncxxOffline
King-Size Canary
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Total posts: 13120
Location: Eh?
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 08-05-2014 16:07    Post subject: Reply with quote

pornosonic1975 wrote:
We certainly aren't hearing about Mr Savile and his provably extensive 'connections' anymore are we?


An interesting point may be that the woman who started the Savile ball rolling (er, so to speak) didn't mention him at all in her original allegations, nor Freddie Starr either, but was reputedly "persuaded" to by a group with a grudge. It's whether that grudge was legitimate is the most important thing, I suppose.
Back to top
View user's profile 
CochiseOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1855
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 59
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 09-05-2014 11:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

pornosonic1975 wrote:
I've not read the entire thread as it's too long, so my apologies if this has been posted earlier.

My theory is that these minor celebrities have been exposed as deviants as a result of the Savile scandal in order to act as as a smokescreen, in that all these allegations are an ideal way to attract attention away from Savile and all the politicians and persons in the establishment whom he had very close associations with. I mean, other than Stuart Hall's admissions (I think he has been VERY poorly advised by his legal team) and one or two people from care homes with dubious credibility - what evidence do we have? How do we know that the anonymous accusers haven't simply been induced to lie by persons unknown?

Exactly HOW do you prove these allegations beyond all reasonable doubt?

We certainly aren't hearing about Mr Savile and his provably extensive 'connections' anymore are we?


Yes, that is basically what I have been thinking as well. There has been some discussion along those lines earlier. Although I'm more on the side of thinking the smokescreen is to cover the backsides of politicians and public servants who were involved with Savile - not necessarily in the crimes, but in allowing someone access to all sorts of places where he never would have been allowed if he wasn't a 'sleb' .
Back to top
View user's profile 
PeripartOffline
is still wondering
Joined: 01 Aug 2005
Total posts: 2910
Age: 46
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 09-05-2014 14:40    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe not so much of a smokescreen, more an embarrassed reaction from a police force which failed to catch Savile at the time. Sort of "OK, we missed him, but we'll find some famous bastard guilty, even if we have to ruin a dozen other lives to get there."
Back to top
View user's profile 
OneWingedBirdOffline
Freelance Subversive
Joined: 19 Nov 2012
Total posts: 1903
Location: Attice of blinkey lights
Age: 45
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 09-05-2014 17:20    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know why this one bothers me in a way none of the others have... really really was hoping it was going to come to nothing, but now... it's really not looking so good.

Quote:
Rolf Harris groomed and molested a friend of his daughter from the age of 13 onwards, a court has heard.

The children's entertainer denies 12 counts of indecently assaulting her and three other girls from 1968-86.

The court heard she used alcohol to cope from the age of 14 and was abused by Mr Harris until she was 29.

The prosecution told Southwark Crown Court Mr Harris, 84, was a "Jekyll and Hyde" character whose fame and reputation made him "untouchable".

His alleged victims were aged between seven or eight and 19 when the offences are said to have taken place.

Seven of the 12 counts are alleged to have been carried out on one victim - his daughter's friend - who lived near the Harris family in south London in the 1960s.
A court sketch of Rolf Harris Sasha Wass QC, prosecuting, said there was a "side" of Mr Harris that was attracted to young girls

The court was read a letter Mr Harris is said to have written to the victim's father in 1997 asking for his forgiveness.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

Concealed behind this charming and amicable children's entertainer lay a man who exploited the very children who were drawn to him”

Sasha Wass QC Prosecuting

The jury was told that, in the letter, Mr Harris said the woman had confronted him about the alleged abuse.

"[She] told me she had been terrified of me," he is said to have written. "I said why didn't you just say no? She said to me: 'How could I say no to the great television star Rolf Harris?'"

Prosecuting, Sasha Wass QC said the girl had been groomed like "a young puppy who had been trained to obey".

The court heard how the girl was abused while on holiday with the family as well as in her home and his.

Ms Wass said the assaults continued "when the opportunity arose" and that by the time she was 14 the girl was relying on alcohol to cope.

The jury was shown a school report which said the alleged victim had become "prone to tears and has been weeping about private/home matters".
Rolf Harris arriving at court Mr Harris and his family were greeted by photographers as they arrived at court

Ms Wass said that, on arrest, Mr Harris "categorically" denied having sexual contact with the girl while she was under 16, and said his letter to her father expressed regret because they had an affair later and he was a "married man".

She added: "The prosecution does not, for a minute, suggest that there is not a good, talented and kind side to Mr Harris.

"But concealed behind this charming and amicable children's entertainer lay a man who exploited the very children who were drawn to him."

She added there was "a side of him which is sexually attracted to children and under-age girls".
'Fame and reputation'

She told the jury "part of the excitement" for Mr Harris was touching "children and women alike in quite brazen circumstances".

Telling the jury about other alleged victims, Ms Wass said one was seven or eight years old when she queued to get an autograph from Mr Harris at a community centre in Portsmouth.

She said he signed an autograph for her then touched her inappropriately, leaving her "in shock".

In other alleged incidents, she said Mr Harris "started rubbing himself" against a 15-year-old girl at a pub in London, and touched a 24-year-old makeup artist in Australia, both in 1986.

Completing her opening statement, she said the evidence showed a "persistent pattern of sexual offending" and demonstrated Mr Harris "had a tendency to touch up females as if he was entitled".

Ms Wass said his fame meant that "no-one suspected or challenged his behaviour".

"Mr Harris was too famous, too powerful and his reputation made him untouchable," she added.

He arrived at court accompanied by his daughter Bindi, and his wife, Alwen Hughes.

He entered a not guilty plea at a hearing in January.

The Australian found fame in 1953 on BBC children's TV, a year after arriving in the UK, and has remained a well-known entertainer, musician and artist since then.

He had success with novelty pop hits and children's TV and variety shows as well as series about animals and art, and he painted a portrait of the Queen in 2005.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27340134
Back to top
View user's profile 
Stu73Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Total posts: 261
Location: Northampton
Age: 41
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 09-05-2014 17:54    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Sort of "OK, we missed him, but we'll find some famous bastard guilty, even if we have to ruin a dozen other lives to get there."


EXACTLY!! No conspiracy as such, more a belated arse covering exercise
Back to top
View user's profile 
CochiseOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1855
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 59
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 10-05-2014 08:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sad sad sad. The only thing to bear in mind is that he hasn't been found guilty yet. There is for example the case of the girl who committed suicide as a result of 'internet bullying' who has now been found to have sent all the 'bullying' emails to herself.

Let's wait and see. One assumes he must have some grounds for defence or he has only made the situation worse by pleading not guilty.
Back to top
View user's profile 
MythopoeikaOffline
Joined: 18 Sep 2001
Total posts: 9706
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 10-05-2014 10:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

I notice that Rolf Harris's normal Facebook page has gone, presumably because of a lot of people posting vitriol. It's been replaced with something fairly bland, with no comments from the public.
As Cochise says, he hasn't been found guilty (yet). His family seem to be sticking by him, which is a good sign, I think.
Back to top
View user's profile 
SameOldVardoger
Great Old One
Location: Scandinavia
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 12-05-2014 13:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rolf Harris' day in court today.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2626120/Childhood-friend-Rolf-Harris-daughter-tells-court-creepy-entertainer-molested-aged-13-got-shower-wearing-just-wraparound-towel-family-holiday.html

Doesn't look good. Friend of his daughter testifying against him.
Back to top
View user's profile 
OneWingedBirdOffline
Freelance Subversive
Joined: 19 Nov 2012
Total posts: 1903
Location: Attice of blinkey lights
Age: 45
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 12-05-2014 17:15    Post subject: Reply with quote

nooo
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 2 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group