***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 29 *****
==============================================================
Ongoing Discussion from Volume 27:
PLEASE NOTE:-
To try and maintain some kind of logical order of discussion, if you start a new subject then reply to this post and remember to change the default subject header.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 15 Jun 16 at 10:27
|
Sad. Old news though.
'Everyone's gone to the moon', or do I misremember? That was very sad too.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 10 Sep 15 at 01:34
|
- - - > 'Everyone's gone to the moon', or do I misremember? That was very sad too.
Erm, what's sad about it: www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWc5kD6Fa_c
|
|
He's already done time for similar offences. I presume this is therefore new and more compelling stuff.
|
>> I presume this is therefore new and more
>> compelling stuff.
Kind of, tho its older stuff.
|
>> Erm, what's sad about it: www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWc5kD6Fa_c
Oddly enough it doesn't sound as terrible as I thought it would. I probably cared a bit more back in the day. But it's still a smug, more or less directionless sixties lyric, and I could never stand the way King looked or posed or mugged.
|
>>But it's still a smug, more or less directionless sixties lyric, and I could never stand the way King looked or posed or mugged.
Most of the 'music' I listened to back in the day had directionless lyrics I suppose, but when you're on your 2nd or 3rd spliff who cares a frack.
:o}
|
DJ Neil Fox has appeared in court charged with six new historical sex offences - taking the number of his alleged victims to nine.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34426221
|
DJ Neil Fox has been cleared of sex assaults
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35096615
|
Lord Janner 'to be found unfit to stand trial'. As had already been established prosecution and defence experts agree he's not fit to plead/instruct etc. Formal decision to be part of hearing set for 07 December which will decide whether to hold a trial of the facts. Judge accepts that an 'unfit' decision is inevitable.
The DPP seems at least partly in the clear now over original decision.
Guardian report below:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/02/lord-janner-will-be-found-unfit-to-stand-trial-over-child-sex-abuse-allegations
Other sources also available.
|
Grauniad was rignt - Janner unfit to stand trial. Reading the report it clearly is genuine - not a Saunders defence.
www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/R-v-Janner-judgment.pdf
|
|
No comment on the alleged crimes of the defendant but what a graphic description of the effects of dementia. You can't but feel sorry for anyone who ends up like that and even more so for their relatives. Scary though that there is every chance that some of us will end up the same way.
|
|
And what a cruel shocking voyeuristic side show that was dragging that sad pathetic shell of a man up before public gaze, just to satisfy some braying donkeys in parliament.
|
|
It was disgusting to see him in court the other month; it degrades the great name of the British justice system. And what the point in having a 'trial of the facts' is, I have no idea at all.
|
"And what the point in having a 'trial of the facts' is, I have no idea at all."
I had assumed that it would possibly give some closure for the (alleged) victims or possibly be an opportunity to clear Lord J's splendid reputation. (Ahem)
|
After reading the report I agree he is unfit to stand trial and that would be the correct decision, I think we have to remember this is not a declaration of his innocence either.
His illness may just be a result of the karma fairy at work, I do hope so.
Pat
|
Nor indeed a declaration of his guilt although you have clearly arrived at that conclusion
|
As have most people who originate from Leicestershire......
Pat
|
I believe some ordinary people also felt that his illness needed to be proved :-)
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=19334&m=432949
|
>> I believe some ordinary people also felt that his illness needed to be proved :-)
>>
>> www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=19334&m=432949
What part of "its fine" did you miss out on?
|
>> Conclusive proof of his illness.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35142675
Even earnest saunders would find it hard to recover from that.
What a shabby period in our history.
|
|
My suspicion is that he faked it and is now swapping tales with Richard John Bingham.
|
He may have faked it, but it is too late now. he is dead.
The bad news for the victims is that 'the trial of facts' dies with him
|
I think the doc means he has faked his death. The other bloke he mentions is Lord Lucan I believe. Black humour...
Personally not sure about the "trial of facts". It effectively meant he could be found guilty (maybe not in so many words) without all the evidence (his included) being heard. So while there does seem to be a reasonable amount fo supporting evidence I do prefer a proper trial where everyone gets to say something.
|
>>I think the doc means he has faked his death... black humour.
Indeed, apologies for any ambiguity.
The trial of facts was always pointless. Just meant the state was doing the suing solicitors work for them (ie. a 'he did it' result would make defence of civil suits against his estate rather difficult)
Now the lawyers will need to do all the legwork and I presume take on a lot more risk than would have been the case if the ToF had happened.
|
>> Now the lawyers will need to do all the legwork and I presume take on
>> a lot more risk than would have been the case if the ToF had happened.
The statement from the victims solicitor is telling
This is devastating news for my clients. They have waited so long to see this case come before the courts, to be denied justice at the final hurdle is deeply frustrating."
In English, this translates into "Bu33er - there goes my pension"
|
Interesting Joshua Rozenberg article debunking the proposition that 'trial of facts' could still take place after Janner's death.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/05/lord-janner-case-cps-crown-prosecution-service-confusion
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 5 Jan 16 at 14:49
|
>>I think the doc means he has faked his death... black humour.
>>>Indeed, apologies for any ambiguity.
Apologies, my sloppy logic. That will teach me to read the link before posting. And thinking about it in the clear light of day I knew (know?) who RJ Bingham was (is). :)
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Sun 20 Dec 15 at 09:04
|
>> thinking about it in the clear light of day I knew (know?) who RJ Bingham
>> was (is). :)
I wonder what diid happen to Richard John Bingham, 7th Earl of Lucan? Everything you wanted - Drinking, Gambling, Womanising, Cheating, A Cad, the unknown - for a novel was there.
So much more class than a slimy predatory dirty ole man with long white greasy hair.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 20 Dec 15 at 09:45
|
The Law Commission has published recommendations on reform to rules of fitness to plead:
www.theguardian.com/law/2016/jan/13/rewrite-rules-governing-fitness-to-stand-trial-says-law-commission
Doubt it's a by product of Janner. The lead time for Law Commission reports is far too long for that.
|
Unsurprisingly the Janner 'trial of facts' case has been dropped after he died.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35321257
(moved to correct place as this has nothing to do with Rolf Harris's discussion)
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 15 Jan 16 at 10:01
|
>> Unsurprisingly the Janner 'trial of facts' case has been dropped after he died.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35321257
Inevitable I think. The overwhelming principle is that charges die with the defendant. Whatever the exceptional/egregious nature of Janner's case (alleged cover up etc) allowing trial of facts for him would open a floodgate.
Correct forum to deal with case is now the overarching child abuse inquiry to carried out by Justice Lowell Goddard.
|
"Correct forum to deal with case is now the overarching child abuse inquiry to carried out by Justice Lowell Goddard."
I'll be dead and buried before it reports. The scope is far too wide.
|
>> I'll be dead and buried before it reports. The scope is far too wide.
Inclined to agree. The structure won't help either. Counsel to the inquiry has already been at 'daggers drawn' with one of expert advisers.
|
|
Wonder if he gets repeat fees..
|
When I was young my father said
'Son I have something to say'
And what he told me I'll never forget
Until my dying days
[Chorus:]
He said son you are a bachelor boy
And that's the way to stay
Son you'll be a bachelor boy
Until your dying days
|
What is it about the music industry?
All those mellow voices from old-time radio and TV now outed much too late as gropers and molesters. It would almost be upsetting if one only gave a damn.
You have to spare a thought for naive girls who weren't up for it. Must have been a good few of those in tears in the back room.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Tue 8 Dec 15 at 21:40
|
>> One law for women and another for men, or a fair sentence?
Would be interesting to see the judges' reasons but they're not yet on either the judiciary website or www.bailii.org/.
Clearly a 21yo male who had sex with an 11yo girl would have gone directly to jail even with, as reflected here, mitigation for youngster's maturity and elder's lack of it. For all the reference to her straddling him and their 'having sex' it's not clear exactly what happened.
Whatever publicity they get cases like this are vanishingly rare and, pragmatically, are on a completely different level to statutory rape of girls/young women.
An exceptional outlier case from which no useful conclusion can be drawn.
|
>>and, pragmatically, are on a completely different level to statutory rape of girls/young women.
That's not what left-wing children's charities tell us. I'm quite surprised at your reaction, actually. Its the sort of view I'd have held twenty years ago, maybe I've been brainwashed since.
|
>>
>> That's not what left-wing children's charities tell us. I'm quite surprised at your reaction, actually.
The PC/feminist standpoint is that rape is the only crime in which:
There are no degrees - all rape is equally bad
There are never any mitigating factors
The victim can never have even the smallest degree of blame.
|
>>There are no degrees - all rape is equally bad
>>There are never any mitigating factors
>>The victim can never have even the smallest degree of blame.
I'm going to need a link to an example of this please.
|
>>
>> I'm going to need a link to an example of this please.
>>
It's just common knowledge. Try arguing against any of those and wait for the vilification to pour out.
|
It's just common knowledge a baseless opinion.
>>Try arguing against any of those and wait for the vilification to pour out.
Ok.
>>There are no degrees - all rape is equally bad
A drunk teenager who has sex with a passed-out girl at a party deserves a lesser sentence than a 50yr old van driver who picks up a school girl, ties her up while threatening to kill her, and then rapes her while knowing that he is HIV positive.
>>There are never any mitigating factors.
See above - lack of premeditation, lack of violence/threats to put victim in state of fear
>>The victim can never have even the smallest degree of blame.
If the victim started to have consensual sex with the offender then says 'no' I would suggest it is a mitigating factor - it's still a criminal act to 'finish up' but warrants a lesser punishment than the van driver mentioned above - if you want to see that as 'blame' then that's your viewpoint.
Come on lefties/handwringers - shoot me down.
|
>> Come on lefties/handwringers - shoot me down.
>>
That's pretty much how I see it.
A sliding scale, not all in the same category, degrees of 'wrong'.
|
>> That's pretty much how I see it.
>>
>> A sliding scale, not all in the same category, degrees of 'wrong'.
If only it worked that way.
Con artist steal pensioners life saving leaving them penniless or mugger pushes over old lady and steals her bag
Wrong? oh yes very very very wrong, deep hurt to victims. Two years Jail Max.
Major Hatton Garden Jewellery raid, Not really that much hurt, mostly rich people who can afford the loss or those who were trying hide assists from the state.
How much do you reckon they will get - 20 years?
|
"How much do you reckon they will get - 20 years? "
Nowhere near. I would reckon on 7 years.
|
>> "How much do you reckon they will get - 20 years? "
>>
>> Nowhere near. I would reckon on 7 years.
More than the life changing mugger tho.
(the bloke who was also on the Brinks Mat robbery wont get away with a 7)
|
>>Con artist steal pensioners life saving leaving them penniless ... Two years Jail Max.
Sometimes you get a judge in a bad mood.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-35006678
|
>> Sometimes you get a judge in a bad mood.
good
|
I might differ in parts/interpretation from Lygonos but certainly won't shoot him down.
A couple of points though.
Firstly, with possible exception of last, each example is definitely rape. Any question of degree is mitigation of sentence only.
It's easy to trivialise the drunk student scenario. One of The Lad's flatmates was assaulted in that way although she's pretty certain drinks were spiked. From his account it was far from a minor matter to her in both it's trauma and the damage to her relationship with her long term boyfriend. She's final year, the offender was a fresher. She chose not to pursue charges.
Daughter of one of Mrs B's friends suffered same - in that case charges are being pressed.
Too simple to fall into lazy assumptions about young women's sexual experience mitigating the effects of the offence.
Victim's blame in the on/off consent situation is one thing, but that's not really what's meant is it? More about how she dressed and where she went?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 20 Dec 15 at 13:49
|
>>
>>
>> It's easy to trivialise the drunk student scenario. One of The Lad's flatmates was assaulted
>> in that way although she's pretty certain drinks were spiked. >>
I tend to be a bit sceptical about those claims. I'm sure many use that as an excuse when they actually got slaughtered by their own efforts.
|
>> I tend to be a bit sceptical about those claims. I'm sure many use that
>> as an excuse when they actually got slaughtered by their own efforts.
While I'm not saying such a thing never happens it's also easy to jump to conclusions.
Buying doubles or adulterating soft drinks was far from unknown in my younger days )and I'm sure yours too).
Add to that availability of Rohypnol and other like products and I'd not want to be judgemental of current claims.
|
>> >>
>> Whatever publicity they get cases like this are vanishingly rare and, pragmatically, are on a completely different level to statutory rape of girls/young women.
>>
>> An exceptional outlier case from which no useful conclusion can be drawn.
>>
How rare or otherwise such a case may be is of no relevance. And why is the attitude to having sex with a child dependant on the gender of the persons involved?
I'm not actually disputing the sentence passed, that is something that should depend on the harm done to the child and in this case (Going by what the press report says) there appears to have been little, if any. But that would not have saved a male from a long stretch in prison for the same offence, even if the girl was sexually experienced and initiated the act.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Wed 9 Dec 15 at 10:51
|
Actual rape is one thing, getting over-excited and bulldozing through a girl's hesitation is another, although related of course. I certainly did that once or twice back in the day. It didn't make me feel triumphant, just guilty and a bit apologetic.
Easy to forget how untidy and chaotic one's behaviour could be in youth. And when as an adult one tries to advise or correct the young, they often don't understand. What a bunch of stupid apes we sometimes seem.
|
>> I certainly did that once or twice back in the day. It didn't make me feel triumphant, just guilty and a bit apologetic.
I should add that in my case it was always between equals. Gross class, wealth or age disparity didn't come into it. It wasn't bullying exactly... but boys are physically stronger than girls as a rule.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sun 20 Dec 15 at 16:04
|
>>Actual rape is one thing, getting over-excited and bulldozing through a girl's hesitation is another...
I think that could get you prosecuted nowadays AC!
A lovely young lass who's parents we are friends with was followed whilst on her way to lectures at a southern university. The culprit was also taking photos of her and making her feel uncomfortable. She caught a bus and he jumped on as well.
She had the foresight to call the police, who took details but shrugged it off with "well if it happens again let us know" - they were clearly not interested.
Later that afternoon when she got back to her house there was a police car waiting with a male and female officer. They escorted here to the local station for a full debrief. It turns out that the culprit went on to commit a violent rape later that day and hadn't been found. They had tried to call her mobile but she forgot to switch it back on after lectures.
In another incident, my daughter's drink was spiked a couple of years back here whilst back from Uni for Christmas. She and here friends had only just had one drink, it was about 10 minutes after I dropped them off, and she was on cola - because she was going to have a very busy next day - and passed out. Luckily her friends and the local bar staff were on the ball and they got an ambulance and to hospital where a urine test confirmed she had been given drugs. The CCTV at the bar didn't help because it was too crowded so the culprit was never found.
Considering the fear that these events caused, despite my generally liberal tendencies, I would like to see some really harsh sentences for rape.
Last edited by: zippy on Sun 20 Dec 15 at 16:15
|
Anything can get you prosecuted if someone runs screaming to the fuzz and exaggerates a bit.
The case you describe though zippy involves quite sinister stalking by a nasty character who richly deserved to be busted. Giving anyone toxic substances without their knowledge is extremely wicked and dangerous. Indeed even voluntary ingestion of quite harmless toxins - alcohol or cannabis for example - can be dangerous. You have to know what you're doing, and things can still go a bit pear-shaped. I speak from long, sometimes alarming experience.
|
>> In another incident, my daughter's drink was spiked a couple of years back here whilst
>> back from Uni for Christmas.
When I first met my ex-wife (I was 29, she was 22 and just out of Uni), we went to a student type party that she'd been invited to.
It wasn't entirely obvious that I was with her, because we went with her female Uni mate as well... and the two girls were chatting for ages, whilst I chatted to others or was nearby.
There was a chap at the do that had been bothering her and wouldn't take 'no' for an answer, but who didn't know I existed.
Her drink was definitely spiked. I ended up calling an ambulance for her and went with her to casualty.
When she came out of it she started swearing.... badly.... which for an exceptionally plummy, well to do sort, was well unusual. The casualty doctor took pity on me (he knew I was Old Bill) and explained it all to me in some depth and that it was normal for some drugs for some patients to react like that.
I know what she'd been drinking, because she lived at my house by then, drove with me to the party and I'd got the two girls drinks for them, however they left them on a shelf in the hallway whilst they were yapping. Neither one of them had drunk much.
|
>> When she came out of it she started swearing.... badly.... which for an exceptionally plummy, well to do sort, was well unusual. The casualty doctor took pity on me (he knew I was Old Bill) and explained it all to me in some depth and that it was normal for some drugs for some patients to react like that.
Last time I had general anaesthetic, I noticed the medics looking a bit traumatized when I came round. It seems I had been e***** and blinding very nastily while unconscious. They were quite disapproving judging by their faces. Dear oh dear...
|
According to the Daily Mail - so it must be true!
Rolf is hiring a new team of lawyers to appeal his sentence and he is willing to spend his entire wealth!
Is it not true if you appeal a sentence it can be reduced OR increased?
tinyurl.com/j4jk6yx
Would it not be better for him to keep his head down & do the sentence? Then go into hiding somewhere. Surely it cannot be that bad - many others survive inside for 3 years by keeping their head down and blanking everything out.
|
if he committed the same crimes today he would have got a much longer sentence?
|
|
Not if he believes he is innocent.
|
>> Not if he believes he is innocent.
The report linked above, Daily Mail plagiarising from Sun, says he's appealing sentence rather than conviction. The evidence, quoted more graphically by the judge in summing up than press were willing to do when reporting, was surely too strong or his conviction to be in doubt.
I linked to it at time and somebody here though it almost pornographic.
Not sure about Harris but some of these historical cases have resulted in lighter sentences due penalties being those at time of offence. Max Clifford was the grossest example - the judge felt obliged to gave him consecutive sentences instead of the more usual concurrent.
|
Announced yesterday that Field Marshall Lord Bramall will face no charges after investigation re child abuse:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/15/lord-bramall-operation-midland-investigation
Interviewed in April 15 and then 9 months wait for a decision. Unlike sum he wasn't arrested/bailed but seems an unconscionable length of time to leave a man on tenterhooks.
|
The police are complaining about their budgets being cut yet they seem perfectly willing to throw money around like confetti so as to be seen to be politically correct -
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3425077/Police-probe-claims-Served-star-John-Inman-sexually-assaulted-13-year-old-schoolboy-1970s.html
|
>> The police are complaining about their budgets being cut yet they seem perfectly willing to
>> throw money around like confetti so as to be seen to be politically correct -
>>
>> www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3425077/Police-probe-claims-Served-star-John-Inman-sexually-assaulted-13-year-old-schoolboy-1970s.html
What they going to do, dig him up for a court appearance?
|
>> The police are complaining about their budgets being cut yet they seem perfectly willing to
>> throw money around like confetti so as to be seen to be politically correct -
>>
>> www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3425077/Police-probe-claims-Served-star-John-Inman-sexually-assaulted-13-year-old-schoolboy-1970s.html
Interesting that it looks as though it's Inman's family rather than the alleged victim who have spoken to the press - though that may be pre-emptive.
Police are in rock/hard place territory. Telling the complainant to p*** off at first instance is not an option. If they fail to make at least some inquiries they'll look negligent if/when other allegations come forward.
OTOH if they've interviewed the complainant, made inquiries of Inman's family and anyone around the Imperial Hotel and Torbay's theatres who might have been around at time they've done their bit.
|
>> Police are in rock/hard place territory. Telling the complainant to p*** off at first instance
>> is not an option. If they fail to make at least some inquiries they'll look
>> negligent if/when other allegations come forward.
They could simply say "we can't prosecute dead people"
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 31 Jan 16 at 15:58
|
>> They could simply say "we can't prosecute dead people"
Ultimately that's what they're going to have to say. Does that mean the door is closed on ANY criminal investigation into activities of dead people however serious the allegation?
If this story were to be true and the 'other party' alleged to have groomed the victim is still alive should he get off?
If the Chief Constable refuses to investigate will he get political and media support or is it more likely he'd be hung out to dry?
|
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCywGhHQMEw
A BBC Three programme, quite apt I think.
|
>> They could simply say "we can't prosecute dead people"
Ultimately that's what they're going to have to say. Does that mean the door is closed on ANY criminal investigation into activities of dead people however serious the allegation?
If this story were to be true and the 'other party' alleged to have groomed the victim is still alive should he get off?
If the Chief Constable refuses to investigate will he get political and media support or is it more likely he'd be hung out to dry?
Easy to solve.
Chief Constable addresses local and county councillors and spells out options:
limited budget, chase long dead cases with zero evidence..or current policing.. and involve Police Commissioner.
Job done. Councillors and public on side..
Not rocket science. Simple politics.
|
"Police are in rock/hard place territory."
Maybe it's time they took a look at Henry V111's behaviour; by all accounts, he wasn't exactly a completely wholesome character.
|
>> "Police are in rock/hard place territory."
>>
>> Maybe it's time they took a look at Henry V111's behaviour; by all accounts, he
>> wasn't exactly a completely wholesome character.
Oiiiiii Leave Henery alone.
|
>> >> "Police are in rock/hard place territory."
Politicians have deliberately emasculated senior police officers...it's been a plan of attack ever since New Labour and for some reason carried on with gusto by the Tories.
Presumably wishing to have 'like minded people' about you started it, then it's been finished by the need/wish to have substantial cost savings.
It is hardly surprising that autonomous decisions are now rare and there's a load of 'yes' men at the helm.
They've ended up with what they've engineered.
|
Rolf Harris is to be charged with seven counts of indecent assault, the Crown Prosecution Service has said.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35561645
Mr Harris will appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 17 March
|
I thought he was making a last ditch attempt at clearing his name by hiring the same PI that DLT used.
He's also put his mansion in Bray, Berks, (worth an estimated £5million), on the market to pay for the investigator’s services.
thisisengland.org.uk/perv-rolf-harris-final-bid-to-clear-name/
|
|
Much of the media seems to think that this £6.5 million enquiry is a whitewash job. I doubt if we will ever know who knew what when, the usual senior management deniability prevails in my opinion.
|
I've had a quick read of bits of it and people seem to have been reasonably open to questions, and fairly honest.
Maybe people are denying they knew anything because they didn't know anything. But that wouldn't make headlines would it, not like a conspiracy or whitewash theory does. The media would have found fault whatever the outcome had been.
The reports are linked to from the BBC website, you could take a read and form your own conclusion. www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/dame_janet_smith
|
|
According to someone on R4 this morning Savile's sexual deviances were well known both within the BBC and by the media in general. Children in Need refused to have him take any part in the programme because of it, and to suggest the stories never got to senior management level is beyond belief.
|
|
A guy I used to work with in a then completely unrelated field, had previously been employed as the manager of a large well known Leeds nightclub. The resident DJ had been Saville. When we discovered that our colleague knew 'someone famous' he was of course asked what he was like in 'real life'. Now bearing in mind that this conversation was taking place back in 1979/80 or so and Saville was to continue to thrive in the BBC for some considerable time to come, it may be unsurprising now to know that our erstwhile colleague would describe him only as 'a very unpleasant man' and refused to be further drawn on the matter.
|
|
During an interview with Tony Blackburn a couple of years ago Piers Morgan, ex editor of the Mirror said that though he thought Savile a bit weird he had no idea of what he had been up to. Yet in either the seventies or the eighties the Mirror investigated claims of sexual abuse by Savile, obtained statements from four alleged victims citing various assaults but had to spike the story because the complainants were to scared to sign them. If the Mirror knew of this you can bet the whole of Fleet Street had heard of it too, and the idea that a later editor of the paper had no knowledge of this is impossible to take seriously. Both the BBC and the rest of the media look to have been too frightened to engage in what could have been a costly battle with e very rich and powerful man.
|
>> to suggest the stories never
>> got to senior management level is beyond belief.
>>
It's the Clifford Principle - the more senior the executive, the greater his capacity for not knowing inconvenient facts.
|
to suggest the stories never
>> got to senior management level is beyond belief.
Except for the culture in the BBC that meant that nobody rocking the boat would ever get promoted, or if they were freelance, any further work. Even where floor staff or producers reported it up the line, it was quite likely not to be passed further up for the same reason.
It's hard to credit what "the Talent" could get away with, according to my long retired pal who did special effects for the BBC for 40 years, the last 20 or so as a freelance after he became a "cost saving"!
Nevertheless, it's hard to believe that nobody, including those who had worked their way to the top, knew anything.
|
>> Except for the culture in the BBC that meant that nobody rocking the boat would
>> ever get promoted, or if they were freelance, any further work.
So the BBC had a bog standard corporate culture?
|
"We have received a full file of evidence from South Yorkshire Police," a spokesperson said.
Could not have come from a better source:) - his lawyers are looking happier.
The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police has been suspended in the wake of a jury's damning verdicts over the Hillsborough disaster.
Mr Crompton has been in charge of South Yorkshire Police since 2012 and had previously announced his plans to retire in November this year. It is understood he will remain on full pay during his suspension.
He was previously mired in scandal when his forced tipped off the BBC that it was planning a raid on Sir Cliff Richard's house in 2014.
The force's handling of the probe - branded incompetent by MPs - has seen Sir Cliff, who strenuously denies any wrongdoing, have the investigation hanging over him to this day.
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Tue 10 May 16 at 16:49
|
|
Perhaps it might be salutory if a few of these chief constables and commissioners were prosecuted for wasting police time?
|
Looks like the CPS are looking at Cliff's file
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36261170
|
>> Looks like the CPS are looking at Cliff's file
He wasn't so evil though was he? I think the cat's being persecuted.
|
|
Under British law you are innocent until proven guilty.
|
>> Under British law you are innocent until proven guilty.
>>
Unfortunately in sex cases you are tainted for life by the accusation, whatever the outcome. Meanwhile even the most malicious complainant keeps his or he anonymity.
|
Jonathan King arrested + two more aged 77 & 88 - henry k
