How long will rofl harris get?

[mudskipper]

If it's the woman I think it is, she waved her right to anonymity.

Edited - no it's not they have removed the pdf

Tonya Lee waived the anonymity. C's forename was dropped in the document throughout.

[SueEllen]

That's one victim.

But as I explicitly stated, I wasn't asking about this case specifically.

Well read what MS wrote.

Victims of abuse will clearly remember the date and place of their abuse.

The accused would have to prove he wasn't there. In the case of a celebrity who is on TV, theatre and/or films its easier to prove where he was.

[Unix]

That sounds like enough to start a case on, not to end it. "Beyond reasonable doubt" requires much more than a bunch of people all claiming they were abused, surely? OK if they all independently claim some specific detail like he stuck is willy in their left ear, or remember he had a mole shaped like a kangaroo on his arse, but it seems unlikely.

I'm not saying the cases aren't correct but just wondering how they get convincing evidence -this is a man's life so a bunch of people claiming something isn't enough IMO. If I found some event he'd been at when I was 8 and claimed he abused me, do they even keep records of every person there that day?

Have you ever been to a court? Have you heard/seen all the evidence from both sides? You seem to going by snippets of the case the press deemed reasonable to report on and your own imagination no doubt sculpted from watching bad US court dramas.

[speling bee]

That sounds like enough to start a case on, not to end it. "Beyond reasonable doubt" requires much more than a bunch of people all claiming they were abused, surely? OK if they all independently claim some specific detail like he stuck is willy in their left ear, or remember he had a mole shaped like a kangaroo on his arse, but it seems unlikely.

I'm not saying the cases aren't correct but just wondering how they get convincing evidence -this is a man's life so a bunch of people claiming something isn't enough IMO. If I found some event he'd been at when I was 8 and claimed he abused me, do they even keep records of every person there that day?

So the 12 members of the jury were negligent?

Were you not able to understand my questions? Did you perhaps misunderstand the question mark and think I was making assertions rather than questions?

I have put the relevant bit in bold for you again if that helps - the bit without the question mark. But let me expand on it:

If a bunch of people claiming something isn't enough, and that is what happened in this case, then was the jury negligent (in your opinion)?

[BoredBloke]

5 years 9 months doesn't sound a lot especially as he'll probably only do half of that.

[SueEllen]

5 years 9 months doesn't sound a lot especially as he'll probably only do half of that.

It's because he is 84, "frail" and his wife's carer.

Strangely 2 years ago he was in really good health when he performed in front of the Queen......

[speling bee]

It's because he is 84, "frail" and his wife's carer.

Strangely 2 years ago he was in really good health when he performed in front of the Queen......

He'll age quick enough inside.

[d000hg]

I have put the relevant bit in bold for you again if that helps - the bit without the question mark. But let me expand on it:

If a bunch of people claiming something isn't enough, and that is what happened in this case, then was the jury negligent (in your opinion)?

As I already said, I don't know what happened in this case. I asked what counted as solid evidence and now you're asserting that what happened was "a bunch of people claiming something". But someone else asserted differently (the letter he wrote).

Is "a bunch of people claiming something" enough for a jury to find guilty or is something more concrete needed? How detailed do the claims have to be given they're childhood memories from decades ago?

[BoredBloke]

It's because he is 84, "frail" and his wife's carer.

Strangely 2 years ago he was in really good health when he performed in front of the Queen......

I don't buy that. Ok he's old, but had he been caught when he was younger then he'd

1 - served longer
2 - had his career ruined earlier
3 - probably lost the wife he 'cares' for

Had he been caught earlier in his life he would have suffered a hell of a lot more than he will now. Personally I hope the dirty old pervert pegs it inside, not least for his version of Stairway To Heaven.

[BoredBloke]

As I already said, I don't know what happened in this case. I asked what counted as solid evidence and now you're asserting that what happened was "a bunch of people claiming something". But someone else asserted differently (the letter he wrote).

Is "a bunch of people claiming something" enough for a jury to find guilty or is something more concrete needed? How detailed do the claims have to be given they're childhood memories from decades ago?

I take it you have not had any dealings with kids who have been sexually abused then! If you did you'd know that events like these are not some fleeting memory.