Anna B Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 I take you won't be supporting your ridiculous claims with evidence. The police have the evidence. But the abused victims will never have the satisfaction of hearing it read out in court. They must be almost screaming to tell the world what happened to them. I would be. It's like being abused twice. First by lord Jenner, and then again by the authorities who are constantly denying them justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 As I was saying above, Lord Ganex also did this, after being jailed for fraud. he had Alzheimers, which is supposedly incurable, and oddly, he made a miraculous recovery as soon as the prison gates closed with him on the outside. I believe his cure was so miraculous, he was able to resume his speaking career on leaving prison. Kagan served his full 10 month sentence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Kagan,_Baron_Kagan No mention of Alzheimers. ---------- Post added 17-04-2015 at 01:32 ---------- Ernest Saunders too. I do think our understanding of Alzheimers has progessed exponentially since the early 90's. http://www.alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=81 Not a valid comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 The police have the evidence. But the abused victims will never have the satisfaction of hearing it read out in court. They must be almost screaming to tell the world what happened to them. I would be. It's like being abused twice. First by lord Jenner, and then again by the authorities who are constantly denying them justice. I wasn't asking for evidence that supports the claim that Lord Jenner abused children, that evidence should have been presented to a court when he was capable of standing trial. I was claiming that sibon wouldn't be supporting his ridiculous claims that I have defended the action of pedophiles, and before you say it, yes I know that he is trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 If he does have severe Alzheimers then it is right that he isn't prosecuted, but the evidence could still be heard in open court. It's still a scandal that he wasn't prosecuted years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHYTOT Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 The police have the evidence. But the abused victims will never have the satisfaction of hearing it read out in court. They must be almost screaming to tell the world what happened to them. I would be. It's like being abused twice. First by lord Jenner, and then again by the authorities who are constantly denying them justice. I suppose those who say Jenner is innocent because his crimes won't be heard in court also assume Savile is an innocent man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloom Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 If he does have severe Alzheimers then it is right that he isn't prosecuted, but the evidence could still be heard in open court. It's still a scandal that he wasn't prosecuted years ago. Indeed it is, and those who have let him allow to escape justice years ago, should now be on trial. The victims deserve NOTHING LESS than a trial to be heard in open court. Meanwhile, Britain's Westminster paedophile scandal continues.... http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=10944687&highlight=westminster#post10944687 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegas1 Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 Indeed it is, and those who have let him allow to escape justice years ago, should now be on trial. The victims deserve NOTHING LESS than a trial to be heard in open court. But there is nobody to "try" in an open court, so it would merely be a vanity exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 But there is nobody to "try" in an open court, so it would merely be a vanity exercise. It would have other purposes. It would go some way to openly validating how his victims felt, and helping them get some compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegas1 Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 It would have other purposes. It would go some way to openly validating how his victims felt, and helping them get some compensation. In which case are they not free to start a civil suit against him, or does his guilt need to be established in a trial first for that to happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 It would have other purposes. It would go some way to openly validating how his victims felt, and helping them get some compensation. You appear to be forgetting that sometimes the accused are found not guilty. William Roache being one such example. How do you propose giving someone a fair trial when they are incapable of even understanding the charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now