FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Bill Roache
Bill Roache
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"What I thinks wrong is how he goes through all of this publicly yet accusers keep anonymity" I agree. Seems a bit unfair to me. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"How a jury is expected to find anyone guilty when an alleged crime happened decades ago and there is no apparent evidence where it is one person's word against another is beyond me. There has to be reasonable doubt in those circumstances and the CPS should think about the cost to everyone involved. I have huge sympathy for those who believed crimes were committed against them and I am sure that there are reasons why they waited years to gain the courage to speak up, but that delay was always going to make a guilty verdict almost impossible." Or it could be the fact he was innocent | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"How a jury is expected to find anyone guilty when an alleged crime happened decades ago and there is no apparent evidence where it is one person's word against another is beyond me. There has to be reasonable doubt in those circumstances and the CPS should think about the cost to everyone involved. I have huge sympathy for those who believed crimes were committed against them and I am sure that there are reasons why they waited years to gain the courage to speak up, but that delay was always going to make a guilty verdict almost impossible." Many *didn't* wait years to speak up but they weren't taken seriously and things somehow, mysteriously, got swept under carpets. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"What I thinks wrong is how he goes through all of this publicly yet accusers keep anonymity" This ^^^^^^ I know no sexual assault is acceptable ( if it happened at all), but we are living in a different era as to when all these people are being accused of sexual assault. I think there are also some people just coming out of the woodwork for possible monetry gain. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"What I thinks wrong is how he goes through all of this publicly yet accusers keep anonymity This ^^^^^^ I know no sexual assault is acceptable ( if it happened at all), but we are living in a different era as to when all these people are being accused of sexual assault. I think there are also some people just coming out of the woodwork for possible monetry gain." Personally, I think that if the person is found to be not guilty, then his/her accusers should be named. In this case, the guy has been through hell and back, and those that caused it will slip back into the cesspool they came from and will never suffer the same humiliation. That's injustice. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"What I thinks wrong is how he goes through all of this publicly yet accusers keep anonymity I agree. Seems a bit unfair to me." | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Knowing who his two business partners are, I think he is a very lucky man with the verdict" Not sure luck is an element that has any part in the system, the jury heard the available evidence hence their verdict.. sounds like your suggesting guilt by association..? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Trouble is shit sticks, I maintain the accused, celebrity or Joe public shouldn't be named until found guilty" I agree, the only reason I know who Bill Roache and Michael Le Vell are is because of the crimes they were accused of. I'm sure avid Coronation Street _iewers would know who they are but those of us that don't watch the soaps it's sad that they gain notoriety with us because of false accusations. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"How a jury is expected to find anyone guilty when an alleged crime happened decades ago and there is no apparent evidence where it is one person's word against another is beyond me. There has to be reasonable doubt in those circumstances and the CPS should think about the cost to everyone involved. I have huge sympathy for those who believed crimes were committed against them and I am sure that there are reasons why they waited years to gain the courage to speak up, but that delay was always going to make a guilty verdict almost impossible." I am in this situation myself. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Knowing who his two business partners are, I think he is a very lucky man with the verdict" dont see how business interests would suggest he is 'lucky' to get away with sexual assault against minors, unless those business interests involve underage sex, there is no correlation. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Good news. Thats another kick in the tits for all the Gold diggers out there jumping on the Saville bandwagon. Rolf will be cleared next, then the Hairy Monster!" And a big kick in the tits for all the real victims of crimes like this , who will be _iewed with even more suspicion now. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"What I thinks wrong is how he goes through all of this publicly yet accusers keep anonymity I agree. Seems a bit unfair to me."can see both sides of the argument, convictions for rape are low and i can only surmise that if the victim/accuser knew they would lose their anonymity in the event of a not guilty verdict then maybe more victims may not come forward..? agree that where it is proven that the accusation was malicious in its intent then there should be a legal sanction for the accuser.. difficult with any historical case to meet the required standard.. thing is we are seeing cases all the time that indictate that for some in homes, religious establishments and some schools that abuse was common.. that any establishment is not mandated by statute even now to report to the authorities to maintain 'reputation' etc is disgusting and shame on our Parliament.. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Knowing who his two business partners are, I think he is a very lucky man with the verdict" He's INNOCENT not lucky. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"How a jury is expected to find anyone guilty when an alleged crime happened decades ago and there is no apparent evidence where it is one person's word against another is beyond me. There has to be reasonable doubt in those circumstances and the CPS should think about the cost to everyone involved. I have huge sympathy for those who believed crimes were committed against them and I am sure that there are reasons why they waited years to gain the courage to speak up, but that delay was always going to make a guilty verdict almost impossible." Well said! We should have a statute of limitations in this country.  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's a bit odd that this has happened to two actors from Corrie though isn't it. " be Norris next lol | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"We should have a statute of limitations in this country. "disagree.. too many people are living with the effects of childhood abuse, well those that may not have taken their own lives that is.. having people held to account sends a message that if you do these things then you may well be held to account even if that is decades later.. that is the least that the victims deserve.. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Knowing who his two business partners are, I think he is a very lucky man with the verdict" Really, REALLY!... He has been publicly accused of raping a young girl in the 60's. He, his family and friends have had to endure the attention of the press and the unjustified attentions of the 'there's no smoke without fire' brigade, and will now have to live with the same lot coming out with the 'well we all know he was really guilty but the jury couldn't really convict because...' If that is your definition of lucky, I wish you and all the others like you all the luck in the world! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Trouble is shit sticks, I maintain the accused, celebrity or Joe public shouldn't be named until found guilty" The most sensible option. I don't think 'victims' should be named though just incase they are truly innocent (as said, proving a crime like this from several decades ago is difficult). | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's a bit odd that this has happened to two actors from Corrie though isn't it. be Norris next lol " I have my doubts about Ena Sharples too???  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Knowing who his two business partners are, I think he is a very lucky man with the verdict Really, REALLY!... He has been publicly accused of raping a young girl in the 60's. He, his family and friends have had to endure the attention of the press and the unjustified attentions of the 'there's no smoke without fire' brigade, and will now have to live with the same lot coming out with the 'well we all know he was really guilty but the jury couldn't really convict because...' If that is your definition of lucky, I wish you and all the others like you all the luck in the world!" | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's a bit odd that this has happened to two actors from Corrie though isn't it. be Norris next lol I have my doubts about Ena Sharples too??? "didn't she die? lol | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Was there a verdict on Rolf Harris yet? Can you see what it is yet?" yes its a naked........ monkey lol | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Well I whole heatedly agree that the accused until proven guilty should receive the annomity that the victims receive , unfortunately I've known someone who was accused but even when proven he was innocent he still had to move , and I've seen it from a family member from the victims side, neither are a position I ever want anyone else to go through . Funny enough I've just heard this on the radio and one of the victims couldn't actually remember it happening ....... " Hmmmm, think I'll avoid Eastbourne. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"We should have a statute of limitations in this country.
disagree..
too many people are living with the effects of childhood abuse, well those that may not have taken their own lives that is..
having people held to account sends a message that if you do these things then you may well be held to account even if that is decades later..
that is the least that the victims deserve.."If they are guilty they should be punished. I agree with that. If however the accused is innocent (like Bill Roache) then they are subject to horrifying trial by media before that is found. Then the "no smoke without fire" trolls will keep fanning the embers ad infinitum. I feel for Bill Roache. The burden of proof on the accuser and the testimony of witnesses about an event that happened 40 years ago is always going to be a huge problem. Far better minds than ours continue to ponder this on a daily basis. I trust they find a solution. However, in the mean time, the Saville band wagon has grown into a juggernaut and we have a long way to go until it is all over.  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's a bit odd that this has happened to two actors from Corrie though isn't it. be Norris next lol I have my doubts about Ena Sharples too???
didn't she die? lol "Hey! We have exhumation in this country where justice is concerned!!  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"How a jury is expected to find anyone guilty when an alleged crime happened decades ago and there is no apparent evidence where it is one person's word against another is beyond me. There has to be reasonable doubt in those circumstances and the CPS should think about the cost to everyone involved. I have huge sympathy for those who believed crimes were committed against them and I am sure that there are reasons why they waited years to gain the courage to speak up, but that delay was always going to make a guilty verdict almost impossible." I felt exactly this when I saw the judge's guidance to the jury. I suspect if we had the Scottish system the verdict may have been Case Unproven. He has been judged innocent and so innocent he is. I hope they all find peace. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Trouble is shit sticks, I maintain the accused, celebrity or Joe public shouldn't be named until found guilty" Is that for all crimes? Assault, theft, murder? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"We should have a statute of limitations in this country.
disagree..
too many people are living with the effects of childhood abuse, well those that may not have taken their own lives that is..
having people held to account sends a message that if you do these things then you may well be held to account even if that is decades later..
that is the least that the victims deserve..
If they are guilty they should be punished. I agree with that.
If however the accused is innocent (like Bill Roache) then they are subject to horrifying trial by media before that is found. Then the "no smoke without fire" trolls will keep fanning the embers ad infinitum. I feel for Bill Roache.
The burden of proof on the accuser and the testimony of witnesses about an event that happened 40 years ago is always going to be a huge problem.
Far better minds than ours continue to ponder this on a daily basis. I trust they find a solution. However, in the mean time, the Saville band wagon has grown into a juggernaut and we have a long way to go until it is all over. " | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Trouble is shit sticks, I maintain the accused, celebrity or Joe public shouldn't be named until found guilty Is that for all crimes? Assault, theft, murder? " The Police say that by announcing the name of the accused they stimulate further witnesses to come forward. By retaining the anonymity of the accuser it encourages them to come forward and report these crimes. The defence say it can start a band wagon with attention seekers trying to get in on the act. If the accusers did not remain anonymous others who have been accused by them and those that know they are attention seeking individuals can come forward for the defence. Its a difficult balance. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
