• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Jimmy Savile 'household name' sweep

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Old Greg View Post
    All we know is that the jury believed there to be reasonable doubt.
    no smoke without fire hey?

    We have to be reasonable and assume SOME allegations made against celebrities are either inflated or done for nefarious purposes. I'm not suggesting all are, as I have said all along there is almost certainly a ring within the BBC/TV circles which people know about widely.

    If the man is truly innocent and it was obvious then I hope he responds by making sure that those who accused him falsely are prosecuted. Whether that be the individual or the people that drove the prosecution knowing it to be false.
    Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.

    Comment


      Originally posted by vetran View Post
      no smoke without fire hey?
      No. Not guilty. End of story.
      And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

      Comment


        Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
        No. Not guilty. End of story.
        That rape allegation didn't do John Leslie's career any harm, did it

        Best Forum Advisor 2014
        Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
        Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

        Comment


          Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
          No. Not guilty. End of story.
          Exactly. But there are no conclusions that can be drawn from this as to whether the complainant was telling the truth or not.

          Comment


            Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
            No. Not guilty. End of story.
            not for him, that was the point we were making.

            We need to address this in the justice system somehow.

            Options as I see them
            1. Controlled anonymity - Judge decides to release name of the accused based on evidence in a closed court and reparations are available.
            2. Where a case is thrown out / unanimous not guilty then a sanction / prosecution of the accuser / prosecutor is formally considered.
            3. CPS decision formulaic and released after not guilty verdict.
            4. Prosecution of 'Perp walk' organisers - perverting the course of justice. (D notice on anonymous accused).
            Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.

            Comment


              Looks like another BBC star arrested.

              64 and due to present a radio show this week. Fairly obvious who this one is.

              Comment


                Originally posted by minestrone View Post
                Looks like another BBC star arrested.

                64 and due to present a radio show this week. Fairly obvious who this one is.
                Not to me, I don't listen to the radio. Who is it?
                "He's actually ripped" - Jared Padalecki

                https://youtu.be/l-PUnsCL590?list=PL...dNeCyi9a&t=615

                Comment


                  Wogan?

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by stek View Post
                    Wogan?
                    My guess is it begins with a G

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
                      My guess is it begins with a G
                      It does begin with a G.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X