Jimmy Savile 'household name' sweep

[NickFitz]

And they were all active in the 70's....

With all the speed he did, it's probably more accurate to say Lemmy was hyperactive in the 70s

[NotAllThere]

And had four days of being hyperactive in his 70s.

[SueEllen]

Adam Johnson, Sunderland footballer - linky

[OwlHoot]

Adam Johnson, Sunderland footballer - linky

I notice neither that article nor the BBC's mentioned the "child's" age.

If they were 15 1/2 or something then it's hardly cradle snatching.

[LondonManc]

I notice neither that article nor the BBC's mentioned the "child's" age.

If they were 15 1/2 or something then it's hardly cradle snatching.

If she's in a nightclub, then it's crap. There's a certain level of culpability with the nightclub for admitting her. If she's got a forged ID that showed she was 18, then he shouldn't be guilty. That said, if he knew she was 15 at the time, then lock the nonce up.

[SueEllen]

I notice neither that article nor the BBC's mentioned the "child's" age.

If they were 15 1/2 or something then it's hardly cradle snatching.

The case was originally heard last year and because of what happened to that 18/19 year old the police and CPS asked the media to act responsibly so they have dropped her age.

[SueEllen]

If she's in a nightclub, then it's crap. There's a certain level of culpability with the nightclub for admitting her. If she's got a forged ID that showed she was 18, then he shouldn't be guilty. That said, if he knew she was 15 at the time, then lock the nonce up.

He's admitted two of the charges which indicates he knew she was under age.

[OwlHoot]

The case was originally heard last year and because of what happened to that 18/19 year old the police and CPS asked the media to act responsibly so they have dropped her age.

So you're saying she was 18 or 19 years old?!

I can see it would be irresponsible for the media to publiush her name, or details that could identify her. But what difference does it make to publish her age (at the time of the incident(s)) ?

[NickFitz]

If she's in a nightclub, then it's crap. There's a certain level of culpability with the nightclub for admitting her. If she's got a forged ID that showed she was 18, then he shouldn't be guilty. That said, if he knew she was 15 at the time, then lock the nonce up.

If a person has consensual sex with a child aged between 13 and 15 while reasonably believing that the child was aged 16 or over, they have a defence to a charge of unlawful sex with a minor. This was the successful defence used by Doug Richard (the Dragons Den guy) in his recent trial. See the Sexual Offences Act section 9.

So if this footballer didn't know the girl was 15, and reasonably believed her to be older than that, his lawyer would have advised him that he had a defence. As he's pleaded guilty, he either knew she was under 16, or his lawyer is crap.

The question of whether or not she was on licensed premises, or had fake ID, or indeed anything else, doesn't matter if he knew her age when he had sex with her.

Given how much footballers get paid, I assume we can also dispose of the crap lawyer hypothesis.

[mudskipper]

If she's in a nightclub, then it's crap. There's a certain level of culpability with the nightclub for admitting her. If she's got a forged ID that showed she was 18, then he shouldn't be guilty. That said, if he knew she was 15 at the time, then lock the nonce up.

He has pleaded guilty to grooming. That's not a one night stand from a nightclub.