Suffragette1 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 So ,in your opinion,do you think its right that the accused be named and the accuser be granted anonymity before any decision to prosecute is made. I would have thought that were obvious that I believe this. I think it right that those being questioned under caution are not named, but as soon as they are arrested they should be. Many rapists are serial offenders and names out in the public domain often bring other victims forward. Victims should be granted anonymity for life, under the present laws, otherwise it would deter even more from reporting especially in light of what happened to the woman who Ched Evans raped. Perhaps one day, victims will not need anonymity, but whilst they continue to be excoriated, villified, demonised, branded as liars, money grabbing bitches, lying slags and sluts who consented etc, they should be protected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Well all I can say is the bay city rollers and the Beatles members must be all Awaiting the Knock the door from the old bill judging by the hoards of young fans screaming undying love and much more in the sixties and seventies :roll:After all they must have been at eh ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Well all I can say is the bay city rollers and the Beatles members must be all Awaiting the Knock the door from the old bill judging by the hoards of young fans screaming undying love and much more in the sixties and seventies :roll:After all they must have been at eh ?? If they have done nothing wrong, then they have nothing to fear. If they knowingly had sex with underage girls and/boys which is classed as rape, then hopefully they are having sleepless nights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Well all I can say is the bay city rollers and the Beatles members must be all Awaiting the Knock the door from the old bill judging by the hoards of young fans screaming undying love and much more in the sixties and seventies :roll:After all they must have been at eh ?? All at it? Clearly you would have been. No wonder you are so defensive of these sexual predators. I would be grateful if you didn't extrapolate your own failings on the rest of us males though. Back on Planet Sensible I can only think that any surviving Beatles or Bay City Rollers member, or any other celebrities from to 60's and 70's, will be nervous of the "Knock" on the door if they know they abused their celebrity and actually committed a crime back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Well all I can say is the bay city rollers and the Beatles members must be all Awaiting the Knock the door from the old bill judging by the hoards of young fans screaming undying love and much more in the sixties and seventies :roll:After all they must have been at eh ?? What young fans? You mean the young vulnerable children fans who across six decades at 14 hospitals including Great Ormond Street and a children's hospice, according to a police report, plus also carried out 14 alleged assaults at schools...you mean those young fans? Btw..do you know what a childrens hospice is? Here's a clue.. "Hospice care is a type and philosophy of care that focuses on the palliative care of a terminally ill or seriously ill patient's pain and symptoms, and attending to their emotional and spiritual needs". The emotional and spiritual need does not include sexual predatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 I would have thought that were obvious that I believe this. I think it right that those being questioned under caution are not named, but as soon as they are arrested they should be. Many rapists are serial offenders and names out in the public domain often bring other victims forward. Victims should be granted anonymity for life, under the present laws, otherwise it would deter even more from reporting especially in light of what happened to the woman who Ched Evans raped. Perhaps one day, victims will not need anonymity, but whilst they continue to be excoriated, villified, demonised, branded as liars, money grabbing bitches, lying slags and sluts who consented etc, they should be protected. But as already stated and indeed history proves that arrest does not constitute guilt and to believe so makes a mockery and shows ignorance of the British judicial system,the term innocent until proven guilty stands as a reminder of the strength and fairness of the system therefore why should it be ok ,in trials like you will see in these matters,that the accused be named,yes,and shamed before guilt is proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiteowl Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 But as already stated and indeed history proves that arrest does not constitute guilt and to believe so makes a mockery and shows ignorance of the British judicial system,the term innocent until proven guilty stands as a reminder of the strength and fairness of the system therefore why should it be ok ,in trials like you will see in these matters,that the accused be named,yes,and shamed before guilt is proven. Indeed - I wonder whether a fair trial is even possible once the accusation is out in the open and under scrutiny like these are. I'm sure some sharp-witted lawyer will be making that point very soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stark Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Indeed - I wonder whether a fair trial is even possible once the accusation is out in the open and under scrutiny like these are. I'm sure some sharp-witted lawyer will be making that point very soon. Indeed. Guilty = celebrity witch hunt Not guilty = celebrity favouritism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 And this relates to this case, how? Here's the opening post again to help you. Micheal le vell, dave lee travis, freddie starr to name but a few, and now william roach!!!! Whhat the heck is going on????? What case do you think this is about, because most of us have been discussing the issue in general. Meanwhile back on Planet Earth they probably did have sex with some of their fans, consensual. Some of them I agree, but not all or even most. What is stopping one of these fans making up a rape claim? What is stopping somebody being an immoral dick you mean? If you need to ask that then all I can say is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billicasper Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Thing is the LAW was very different to what it is now. I dont agree that most crimes commited say 20 or 30 years ago can be viewed or judged by todays standards. For example the film "Rita,Sue and Bob too" a middle aged married guy going out with two girls at school, asian jokes and upto stuff in cars. In the eightys this was almost acceptable and funny enough to make a film. In 2013 Bob would be arrested for being a Peedo The folks in it would all be racist and charged and theyd get arrested for doggin' Amongst all the other stuff in the film........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.