FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Tory mp and the criminal sexual allegations
Tory mp and the criminal sexual allegations
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *abio OP Man
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
I am going to be really careful with what I am saying to stay the right side of the site…
So he has been asked to stay away from parliament… but they won’t take the whip away as that would out him, but if the police have enough evidence to charge then should they not name him anyway?
Any from the statement the met police gave yesterday, they worked out it could only be one of 6 people… and since one of them is the PM, we can cross him off!!!
Also if you are one of the 5… wouldn’t you pre-emptively say it wasn’t you to stop any speculation
Anyway… see how many of the 5 turn up at PMQS… please don’t dm me a name even if you are tempted to |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am going to be really careful with what I am saying to stay the right side of the site…
So he has been asked to stay away from parliament… but they won’t take the whip away as that would out him, but if the police have enough evidence to charge then should they not name him anyway?
Any from the statement the met police gave yesterday, they worked out it could only be one of 6 people… and since one of them is the PM, we can cross him off!!!
Also if you are one of the 5… wouldn’t you pre-emptively say it wasn’t you to stop any speculation
Anyway… see how many of the 5 turn up at PMQS… please don’t dm me a name even if you are tempted to "
Indeed. I had a look as to why he hadn't been named. Channel 4 have a pretty good summing up of why.
Have to say, though; if it had been anyone other than an MP, his name would be out there, to see if anyone else had been affected by him, in a search for further potential evidence. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
If he has been charged then name him as someone else said if he has other victims it could encourage them to come forward, if its allegations at the mo then no dont name him, that should be the way it goes wether your an m.p a sportsman or just a normal person |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
I do ponder the releasing of names as it’s a black mark for ever even if you are innocent .
The other side of the coin is a Jimmy Saville victim backed out decades before his death because she feared she was the only victim and didn’t want to fight one to one. She said who would believe her against a national treasure like jimmy.
If only the police had told her there were others but sadly and appallingly they didn’t. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maddest of all, Fabricant seemed to make a joke about the situation on twitter. Because what's funnier than this sort of thing? 
He's a complete and utter moron so no real surprises .."
Bit unfair to morons, comparing them to him... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am going to be really careful with what I am saying to stay the right side of the site…
So he has been asked to stay away from parliament… but they won’t take the whip away as that would out him, but if the police have enough evidence to charge then should they not name him anyway?
Any from the statement the met police gave yesterday, they worked out it could only be one of 6 people… and since one of them is the PM, we can cross him off!!!
Also if you are one of the 5… wouldn’t you pre-emptively say it wasn’t you to stop any speculation
Anyway… see how many of the 5 turn up at PMQS… please don’t dm me a name even if you are tempted to "
There will probably be a twist to this story,,, I am going to throw it out there the victim and perp are the same sex.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There will probably be a twist to this story,,, I am going to throw it out there the victim and perp are the same sex. "
I was going to add another twist...the victim was under the age of consent at the time.
Then I realised Conservative governments are more often than not brought down by sleaze, sex scandals and corruption, so that's not a twist, it's business as usual (modus operandi)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
"
There is however the example of the case of the police investigation team being told to back off, after catching Cyril Smith in a planned police operation abusing boys. That tells you that someone higher up the food chain intervened and closed down that investigation.
As a consequence I’m leaning towards naming as I can’t see many wanting to make a financial career out of making false r4pe allegations. So the cash and publicity hunters I’m sure exist but not in any significant number to hinder justice. Perjury carries some serious sentences.
I do however as I posted above have mixed views on publishing names especially of the innocent who have the stain for ever. It’s not an easy answer. Who’s innocent snd who isn’t?. How many r4pe cases have been rejected in the past because the police thought the victim was asking for it. Times have changed but attitudes still linger. Jimmy Saville knew his victims would be dismissed as money grabbers.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *sGivesWoodWoman
over a year ago
ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL |
"There will probably be a twist to this story,,, I am going to throw it out there the victim and perp are the same sex.
I was going to add another twist...the victim was under the age of consent at the time.
Then I realised Conservative governments are more often than not brought down by sleaze, sex scandals and corruption, so that's not a twist, it's business as usual (modus operandi)
"
Pretty much the same for all parties, not just the tories. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
There is however the example of the case of the police investigation team being told to back off, after catching Cyril Smith in a planned police operation abusing boys. That tells you that someone higher up the food chain intervened and closed down that investigation.
As a consequence I’m leaning towards naming as I can’t see many wanting to make a financial career out of making false r4pe allegations. So the cash and publicity hunters I’m sure exist but not in any significant number to hinder justice. Perjury carries some serious sentences.
I do however as I posted above have mixed views on publishing names especially of the innocent who have the stain for ever. It’s not an easy answer. Who’s innocent snd who isn’t?. How many r4pe cases have been rejected in the past because the police thought the victim was asking for it. Times have changed but attitudes still linger. Jimmy Saville knew his victims would be dismissed as money grabbers.
"
My experience of Government, Local Government and police leads me to believe that those at the very top are more likely to be there because of their political skills than any ability to do the job without fear or favour. I can therefore well understand political interference getting in the way.
There is however a balance to be struck. Do you allow naming and go fishing or do you honour the "innocent until proven guilty" adage and keep their name out of it?
Would anyone welcome giving out the name of an alleged r*ape victim to see is she (or he) is a serial accuser? I strongly doubt it and the police, who have no interest in gathering evidence to prove the accused innocent, will not bother to check. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
There is however the example of the case of the police investigation team being told to back off, after catching Cyril Smith in a planned police operation abusing boys. That tells you that someone higher up the food chain intervened and closed down that investigation.
As a consequence I’m leaning towards naming as I can’t see many wanting to make a financial career out of making false r4pe allegations. So the cash and publicity hunters I’m sure exist but not in any significant number to hinder justice. Perjury carries some serious sentences.
I do however as I posted above have mixed views on publishing names especially of the innocent who have the stain for ever. It’s not an easy answer. Who’s innocent snd who isn’t?. How many r4pe cases have been rejected in the past because the police thought the victim was asking for it. Times have changed but attitudes still linger. Jimmy Saville knew his victims would be dismissed as money grabbers.
My experience of Government, Local Government and police leads me to believe that those at the very top are more likely to be there because of their political skills than any ability to do the job without fear or favour. I can therefore well understand political interference getting in the way.
There is however a balance to be struck. Do you allow naming and go fishing or do you honour the "innocent until proven guilty" adage and keep their name out of it?
Would anyone welcome giving out the name of an alleged r*ape victim to see is she (or he) is a serial accuser? I strongly doubt it and the police, who have no interest in gathering evidence to prove the accused innocent, will not bother to check."
I agree with your points as they are all valid.
The only issue I have is with the likes of Jimmy Saville. A young girl was attempting to get him prosecuted at least a decade before he died but because she thought she was alone she decided no one would believe her. The police didn’t tell her about the dozens of other reports and they didn’t collate the cases at all. West Yorkshire police just shelved the whole thing despite being advised by Thames Valley police.
If others knew about the single girl and came forward maybe he would have been stopped sooner.
When you watch his behaviour back he was telling everyone what he was doing but everyone thought it was just his silly sense of humour.
He was a horrific human being. The establishment failed his victims and in many cases they just didn’t want to upset him or cause a fuss. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
There is however the example of the case of the police investigation team being told to back off, after catching Cyril Smith in a planned police operation abusing boys. That tells you that someone higher up the food chain intervened and closed down that investigation.
As a consequence I’m leaning towards naming as I can’t see many wanting to make a financial career out of making false r4pe allegations. So the cash and publicity hunters I’m sure exist but not in any significant number to hinder justice. Perjury carries some serious sentences.
I do however as I posted above have mixed views on publishing names especially of the innocent who have the stain for ever. It’s not an easy answer. Who’s innocent snd who isn’t?. How many r4pe cases have been rejected in the past because the police thought the victim was asking for it. Times have changed but attitudes still linger. Jimmy Saville knew his victims would be dismissed as money grabbers.
My experience of Government, Local Government and police leads me to believe that those at the very top are more likely to be there because of their political skills than any ability to do the job without fear or favour. I can therefore well understand political interference getting in the way.
There is however a balance to be struck. Do you allow naming and go fishing or do you honour the "innocent until proven guilty" adage and keep their name out of it?
Would anyone welcome giving out the name of an alleged r*ape victim to see is she (or he) is a serial accuser? I strongly doubt it and the police, who have no interest in gathering evidence to prove the accused innocent, will not bother to check.
I agree with your points as they are all valid.
The only issue I have is with the likes of Jimmy Saville. A young girl was attempting to get him prosecuted at least a decade before he died but because she thought she was alone she decided no one would believe her. The police didn’t tell her about the dozens of other reports and they didn’t collate the cases at all. West Yorkshire police just shelved the whole thing despite being advised by Thames Valley police.
If others knew about the single girl and came forward maybe he would have been stopped sooner.
When you watch his behaviour back he was telling everyone what he was doing but everyone thought it was just his silly sense of humour.
He was a horrific human being. The establishment failed his victims and in many cases they just didn’t want to upset him or cause a fuss. "
He was a textbook case of having friends in high places. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
There is however the example of the case of the police investigation team being told to back off, after catching Cyril Smith in a planned police operation abusing boys. That tells you that someone higher up the food chain intervened and closed down that investigation.
As a consequence I’m leaning towards naming as I can’t see many wanting to make a financial career out of making false r4pe allegations. So the cash and publicity hunters I’m sure exist but not in any significant number to hinder justice. Perjury carries some serious sentences.
I do however as I posted above have mixed views on publishing names especially of the innocent who have the stain for ever. It’s not an easy answer. Who’s innocent snd who isn’t?. How many r4pe cases have been rejected in the past because the police thought the victim was asking for it. Times have changed but attitudes still linger. Jimmy Saville knew his victims would be dismissed as money grabbers.
My experience of Government, Local Government and police leads me to believe that those at the very top are more likely to be there because of their political skills than any ability to do the job without fear or favour. I can therefore well understand political interference getting in the way.
There is however a balance to be struck. Do you allow naming and go fishing or do you honour the "innocent until proven guilty" adage and keep their name out of it?
Would anyone welcome giving out the name of an alleged r*ape victim to see is she (or he) is a serial accuser? I strongly doubt it and the police, who have no interest in gathering evidence to prove the accused innocent, will not bother to check.
I agree with your points as they are all valid.
The only issue I have is with the likes of Jimmy Saville. A young girl was attempting to get him prosecuted at least a decade before he died but because she thought she was alone she decided no one would believe her. The police didn’t tell her about the dozens of other reports and they didn’t collate the cases at all. West Yorkshire police just shelved the whole thing despite being advised by Thames Valley police.
If others knew about the single girl and came forward maybe he would have been stopped sooner.
When you watch his behaviour back he was telling everyone what he was doing but everyone thought it was just his silly sense of humour.
He was a horrific human being. The establishment failed his victims and in many cases they just didn’t want to upset him or cause a fuss.
He was a textbook case of having friends in high places. "
Indeed |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
There is however the example of the case of the police investigation team being told to back off, after catching Cyril Smith in a planned police operation abusing boys. That tells you that someone higher up the food chain intervened and closed down that investigation.
As a consequence I’m leaning towards naming as I can’t see many wanting to make a financial career out of making false r4pe allegations. So the cash and publicity hunters I’m sure exist but not in any significant number to hinder justice. Perjury carries some serious sentences.
I do however as I posted above have mixed views on publishing names especially of the innocent who have the stain for ever. It’s not an easy answer. Who’s innocent snd who isn’t?. How many r4pe cases have been rejected in the past because the police thought the victim was asking for it. Times have changed but attitudes still linger. Jimmy Saville knew his victims would be dismissed as money grabbers.
My experience of Government, Local Government and police leads me to believe that those at the very top are more likely to be there because of their political skills than any ability to do the job without fear or favour. I can therefore well understand political interference getting in the way.
There is however a balance to be struck. Do you allow naming and go fishing or do you honour the "innocent until proven guilty" adage and keep their name out of it?
Would anyone welcome giving out the name of an alleged r*ape victim to see is she (or he) is a serial accuser? I strongly doubt it and the police, who have no interest in gathering evidence to prove the accused innocent, will not bother to check.
I agree with your points as they are all valid.
The only issue I have is with the likes of Jimmy Saville. A young girl was attempting to get him prosecuted at least a decade before he died but because she thought she was alone she decided no one would believe her. The police didn’t tell her about the dozens of other reports and they didn’t collate the cases at all. West Yorkshire police just shelved the whole thing despite being advised by Thames Valley police.
If others knew about the single girl and came forward maybe he would have been stopped sooner.
When you watch his behaviour back he was telling everyone what he was doing but everyone thought it was just his silly sense of humour.
He was a horrific human being. The establishment failed his victims and in many cases they just didn’t want to upset him or cause a fuss.
He was a textbook case of having friends in high places.
Indeed "
I do agree, the Savile situation was awful. He was viewed as total do gooder so it was hard for the public to accept how he was. It is a pity Johnny Rotten's comments were not taken more notice of. As for the police, they knew there were more accusations against him but chose to do nothing. They must bear a lot of the blame.
Thankfully the Saviles of this world are the exception so let us give the "Fred Smiths" a chance of living through this anonymously until found guilty. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Cliff Richard was named, even yo the fact the BBC were invited to bring a helicopter to film his arrest. That was even before any charges.
As with many others, name him.
"
isnt that a reason not to name him ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Cliff Richard was named, even yo the fact the BBC were invited to bring a helicopter to film his arrest. That was even before any charges.
As with many others, name him.
isnt that a reason not to name him ?"
Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not the court of public opinion.
Cliff Richard sued the BBC over their coverage of his premises being searched by the police. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Whilst releasing names to enable the police to go on a fishing trip sounds a good move to some, with the rich and/or famous, it often attracts false claims from publicity seekers.
Then, even if found innocent, the man is forever stained with "He was a r*pist but got away with it because he was rich and famous".
Least we forget, Operation Midland, where Edward Heath (exPM) and Leon Brittan amongst others were falsely accused of r*pe by a man called "Nick". Brittan died of cancer with these accusations hanging over him.
There is however the example of the case of the police investigation team being told to back off, after catching Cyril Smith in a planned police operation abusing boys. That tells you that someone higher up the food chain intervened and closed down that investigation.
As a consequence I’m leaning towards naming as I can’t see many wanting to make a financial career out of making false r4pe allegations. So the cash and publicity hunters I’m sure exist but not in any significant number to hinder justice. Perjury carries some serious sentences.
I do however as I posted above have mixed views on publishing names especially of the innocent who have the stain for ever. It’s not an easy answer. Who’s innocent snd who isn’t?. How many r4pe cases have been rejected in the past because the police thought the victim was asking for it. Times have changed but attitudes still linger. Jimmy Saville knew his victims would be dismissed as money grabbers.
My experience of Government, Local Government and police leads me to believe that those at the very top are more likely to be there because of their political skills than any ability to do the job without fear or favour. I can therefore well understand political interference getting in the way.
There is however a balance to be struck. Do you allow naming and go fishing or do you honour the "innocent until proven guilty" adage and keep their name out of it?
Would anyone welcome giving out the name of an alleged r*ape victim to see is she (or he) is a serial accuser? I strongly doubt it and the police, who have no interest in gathering evidence to prove the accused innocent, will not bother to check.
I agree with your points as they are all valid.
The only issue I have is with the likes of Jimmy Saville. A young girl was attempting to get him prosecuted at least a decade before he died but because she thought she was alone she decided no one would believe her. The police didn’t tell her about the dozens of other reports and they didn’t collate the cases at all. West Yorkshire police just shelved the whole thing despite being advised by Thames Valley police.
If others knew about the single girl and came forward maybe he would have been stopped sooner.
When you watch his behaviour back he was telling everyone what he was doing but everyone thought it was just his silly sense of humour.
He was a horrific human being. The establishment failed his victims and in many cases they just didn’t want to upset him or cause a fuss.
He was a textbook case of having friends in high places.
Indeed
I do agree, the Savile situation was awful. He was viewed as total do gooder so it was hard for the public to accept how he was. It is a pity Johnny Rotten's comments were not taken more notice of. As for the police, they knew there were more accusations against him but chose to do nothing. They must bear a lot of the blame.
Thankfully the Saviles of this world are the exception so let us give the "Fred Smiths" a chance of living through this anonymously until found guilty. "
I do agree with you but I have a nagging doubt that’s all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is the general opinion that everyone arrested for a crime should be named? Seriously? FFS "
Everyone who wants to know can easily find out who this MP is |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is the general opinion that everyone arrested for a crime should be named? Seriously? FFS
Everyone who wants to know can easily find out who this MP is "
True enough and if he is found guilty, to hell with him but if he isn't? This is going down an ugly road. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Cliff Richard was named, even yo the fact the BBC were invited to bring a helicopter to film his arrest. That was even before any charges.
As with many others, name him.
"
Which was a disgusting thing to happen to him or anyone else and he rightly gave the BBC a right spanking in the courts  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I was trying to find out who this mp is when I came across a story in the telegraph from Wednesday
"An allegation of rope against a Tory MP was made by a male politician who was a teenager when they first met, The Telegraph understands, amid growing pressure on the Conservative Party to name him...."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Look up nipplegate. New allegations about a senior Tory using date r*pe drugs...
Another one? "
I think so. But there are so many at this point, I'm losing track. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Look up nipplegate. New allegations about a senior Tory using date r*pe drugs...
Another one?
I think so. But there are so many at this point, I'm losing track."
#notalltories
Although when even those not accused come wading in to support convicted colleagues, it's not a great look !
BBC News - Crispin Blunt says sex offender's conviction is 'miscarriage of justice'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-61470697
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
