Just saw on the new that Max Clifford has been questioned over historic abuse allegations.
Where will it all end?
I reckon there's a few people in the public eye who are shitting blue bricks at the moment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just saw on the new that Max Clifford has been questioned over historic abuse allegations.
Where will it all end?
I reckon there's a few people in the public eye who are shitting blue bricks at the moment. "
Jeez, not another one, poor Stuart Halls getting the treatment now.
( See joke thread  ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just saw on the new that Max Clifford has been questioned over historic abuse allegations.
Where will it all end?
I reckon there's a few people in the public eye who are shitting blue bricks at the moment.
Jeez, not another one, poor Stuart Halls getting the treatment now.
( See joke thread ) "
Nothing poor about him |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"And many thousands NOT in the public eye who are seemingly forgotten because the tabloids seem to be avoiding the point that it's a daily occurance in this country..."
True Jane, the one good thing this whole Jimmy Saville malarkey is that it's given victims of abuse the courage to speak up after years of keeping it bottled up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm wondering if the police are trawling through old complaints files and finally deciding that it is worthwhile bringing a case against a "celeb" to light, in view of the number of current high profile names coming to the fore.
After all lots of people said they reported their assaults many years ago but the police decided not to take it further.
Perhaps the police see it as a chance to clear the decks and make themselves look better when people are asking why they didn't act years ago?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm wondering if the police are trawling through old complaints files and finally deciding that it is worthwhile bringing a case against a "celeb" to light, in view of the number of current high profile names coming to the fore.
After all lots of people said they reported their assaults many years ago but the police decided not to take it further.
Perhaps the police see it as a chance to clear the decks and make themselves look better when people are asking why they didn't act years ago??"
That's a fair point, cynical but I hope not. I hope it's more likely that the victims have maybe realised that they may now finally be believed and decided to come forward.
Must have been hard because as a child and somebody famous says "who will the police believe" which was probably right as well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The abuser doesn't have to be famous for a victim to believe that they won't be listened to and believed.
Abusers use all kinds of ways to silence their victims from children to women suffering domestic abuse.
We only ever hear about a minority of victims. Many remain silenced and hidden  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
I saw the announcement on the BBC News web-site earlier today. I have a recollection of him "representing" someone who was abused but I can't remember who.
The Stuart Hall announcement yesterday was also quite shocking. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago
carrbrook stalybridge |
"It would be a much fairer justice system.if people's name's were not dragged through the mud,untill they had a trial,and were proven guilty.
Speculation,and innuendo,are not justice."
but then the murdoch press wouldnt have a big stick to beat the BBC with would they look at the headlines in the sun prominantly headling the BBC with every case guilt by association and all that after all they are skys biggest rivals in the uk |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago
glasgow |
"It would be a much fairer justice system.if people's name's were not dragged through the mud,untill they had a trial,and were proven guilty.
Speculation,and innuendo,are not justice.but then the murdoch press wouldnt have a big stick to beat the BBC with would they look at the headlines in the sun prominantly headling the BBC with every case guilt by association and all that after all they are skys biggest rivals in the uk "
very cynical.are you suggesting murdoch is using his empire to discredit,and disparage,his rivals,tut tut tut.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It would be a much fairer justice system.if people's name's were not dragged through the mud,untill they had a trial,and were proven guilty.
Speculation,and innuendo,are not justice.but then the murdoch press wouldnt have a big stick to beat the BBC with would they look at the headlines in the sun prominantly headling the BBC with every case guilt by association and all that after all they are skys biggest rivals in the uk "
Nah....Virgin are Sky's biggest UK rivals |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The abuser doesn't have to be famous for a victim to believe that they won't be listened to and believed.
Abusers use all kinds of ways to silence their victims from children to women suffering domestic abuse.
We only ever hear about a minority of victims. Many remain silenced and hidden "
Well said and sadly so true  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago
glasgow |
"It would be a much fairer justice system.if people's name's were not dragged through the mud,untill they had a trial,and were proven guilty.
Speculation,and innuendo,are not justice.but then the murdoch press wouldnt have a big stick to beat the BBC with would they look at the headlines in the sun prominantly headling the BBC with every case guilt by association and all that after all they are skys biggest rivals in the uk
Nah....Virgin are Sky's biggest UK rivals"
i would have to agree jane.
sky could never rival the bbc,when it comes to respect,and credibility.
it's not always about being the biggest,and who makes the most money. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It would be a much fairer justice system.if people's name's were not dragged through the mud,untill they had a trial,and were proven guilty.
Speculation,and innuendo,are not justice."
Agreed. The police are being completely unprofessional releasing the names of the people they are questioning.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"It would be a much fairer justice system.if people's name's were not dragged through the mud,untill they had a trial,and were proven guilty.
Speculation,and innuendo,are not justice.
Agreed. The police are being completely unprofessional releasing the names of the people they are questioning. "
I think there are people other press stringers are keeping on watch too. The police may not be releasing the information in every case. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Does everyone remember Matthew Kelly getting arrested for sexual assault? Who in slaughtered from the press and there was many a joke going round and then he was found innocent but his career was already over by then, all because people released his name to the press, when he went on frank skinner and challenged him was really good viewing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
as someone who recently reported abuse i couldnt be more disgusted with the way this is being handled.
First there is evidence that the police and media knew about some of these cases years ago but didnt act.
sexual abuse is difficult to prove but its much harder to proove if not investigated immediatly.
Secondly the media and police are handling this in a way that discredits victims by naming people accused. On top of that they told the guy who said he was abused by a high ranking tory that his abuser was lord mcalpine. The victim didnt know who it was untill they suggested a name. Now that victim looks dis credited. I am also unhappy about how they are categorising this as "savile" "savile and others" and lastly "others" it makes it look like that unless you were abused by savile himself you arent very important. There appears to be an un willingness in this country to take sexual and abusive offences seriously. Perhaps this is because it is such a common occurrence that the public if given the full facts and stats are going to be horrified. For anyone interested i would suggest you check out the story of Holly Grieg. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
With the names being published, if they do end up in court would a good lawyer be able to use this as a basis for not being able to get a fair trial?
If that happens we will never know who is or isn't guilty? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"With the names being published, if they do end up in court would a good lawyer be able to use this as a basis for not being able to get a fair trial?
If that happens we will never know who is or isn't guilty?"
of course if they cant get convictions then it makes it look like the victims have made it all up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
These cases so often are prosecuted after a not inconsiderable period of time has passed.So often the case comes down to one person's word against another's and thus the credibility & weight of the survivor/witness is key.
One way to test (& potentially improve) that credibility is to publicise the fact that an individual is being questioned & that gives other survivors the opportunity to come forward (and will in many cases incentivise them to do so). If accounts corroborate one another and are consistent then they can strengthen the case CPS' case. At least that is the rationale used to justify the publicising of such cases.
For my part I think that anonymity should be preserved because the damage that can be done to an erroneously accused individual is so great. An unfortunate consequence of this is that many survivors would be denied justice as their accounts can't be corroborated.
Instead where these abuse cases have occurred in close proximity to large institutions (such as the BBC of the NHS), a) it needs to be established whether there is any institutional liability and b) how controls can be instituted to mitigate against the possible recurrence of such abuses.
Those are just my thoughts anyway...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
