Things that make you SAD thread.

[Paul]

Took my wife to see Custard Beast on one of our first dates, she didn't know what to make of it

RIP Mel

 

[Tony Towner]

Rolf Harris, innocent until proven guilty I know, but just so, so disappointed

 

[Penk Wolf]

It's the age of these girls that's getting to me.

 

[Langers]

Only just seen the news about Rolf Harris. A 7/8 year old FFS!! Really disappointing - he was always one of my all time favourite entertainers.

 

[Kenny]

Only just seen the news about Rolf Harris. A 7/8 year old FFS!! Really disappointing - he was always one of my all time favourite entertainers.

Well it is just alleged right now so save the disappointment for a bit.

What I want to know is how they get enough evidence for a crime of this nature some, 30/40/50 years later. Do they hope the pressure on the defendant builds so much they crack (ala Mr S Hall) and admit it?

 

[Langers]

Well it is just alleged right now so save the disappointment for a bit.

Yeah true. Obviously I hope it's a crock of shit.

 

[Kenny]

Yeah true. Obviously I hope it's a crock of shit.

I'm not sure what to make of it all really.

It's a shame that those charged and found not guilty will still have the stigma of the offence to live with.

The bloke from Corrie that was found not guilty a few months back is still receiving death threats for, well doing nothing wrong.

Should those charged with an offence of this nature have their name hidden until/if found guilty?

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Should those charged with an offence of this nature have their name hidden until/if found guilty?

No. The only realistic way of getting corroborative evidence is to make the name known. One of the common traits of this form of abuse is the manipulation of the victim to keep their silence. They won't come out unless they are confident they will be believed.

There is a balance to be struck that protects the victim and the accused - the accused has all the criminal justice system which has to prove beyond reasonable doubt. The victim has high hurdles in order to turn and allegation into a conviction.

 

[Kenny]

No. The only realistic way of getting corroborative evidence is to make the name known. One of the common traits of this form of abuse is the manipulation of the victim to keep their silence. They won't come out unless they are confident they will be believed.

There is a balance to be struck that protects the victim and the accused - the accused has all the criminal justice system which has to prove beyond reasonable doubt. The victim has high hurdles in order to turn and allegation into a conviction.

Great reply. I was just throwing that statement out there as I just feel uncomfortable with something regarding these kind of cases and not sure why either.

 

[The Bear]

I completely disagree. The name should be protected until any charges are made.

If you need to release their name in the media to get corroborative evidence then you haven't really got much of a case to start with. If and when there's enough evidence to be charged with the original offence then that is the time for the name to go out and other people to come forward if they wish.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Harris has been charged. The issue is really if someone is charged and then found not guilty so whether naming occurs before or after charges are laid is a bit moot. An ideal world would see the name protected until after guilt has been established in a court, but this isn't an ideal world.

 

[Penk Wolf]

I'd say that even if he's found not guilty then there must have been enough evidence against him for the CP to have took it to court in the first place.

Horrible man.

 

[YoungWolf]

The ages of the girls are really scary. My whole class met him on a school trip when we were 8/9, at the history museum. We weren't the only school there either. Still have a shirt signed by him somewhere...

 

[lemonjelly]

Dangerous ground though Penk. That position falls in to the trap of no smoke without fire.

 

[Penk Wolf]

Which is usually the case nowadays.

So, if he's found not guilty, we should accept that he's innocent and let him take our kids away on holiday?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

The man is entitled to a fair trial before being judged.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Which is usually the case nowadays.

So, if he's found not guilty, we should accept that he's innocent and let him take our kids away on holiday?

That's the sort of thinking that brings problems with the current system, you spread people's names all across the papers hoping to gain further evidence and then everyone comes to the conclusion that there must be something going on for it to get that far, then even if they're found not guilty they still have the stigma attached.

 

[lemonjelly]

Which is usually the case nowadays.

So, if he's found not guilty, we should accept that he's innocent and let him take our kids away on holiday?

Many good, honest people work in environments with young people & children. I'm one - I spent 10 years working with vulnerable kids in one place. On occasions there were risky scenarios, & the young people aren't as aware of some of the risky situations they can place themselves, or other people in. Simple example, but in the middle of hot summers they would feel it's ok to walk from the garden where they're sunbathing into the office, in a bikini. Very inappropriate, but normal for them. & that must've been a sight to joe public walking past the window.

We have to be careful about assuming everyone who works with kids/young people is a paedophile. I've worked with a number of social work students who change their studies because they are afraid of being accused of similar, or because they worry about being caught up in a baby p style case. Yet these are likely to be the best people to prevent/reduce similar cases in the future.

 

[Kenny]

Which is usually the case nowadays.

So, if he's found not guilty, we should accept that he's innocent and let him take our kids away on holiday?

So if you were accused of something like this. The CPS decided that the word of 2 people was enough to take it to court but during the trial you were found not guilty would you be happy to spend the rest of your life being judged on a lie?

 

[Penk Wolf]

Like I say, Crown Prosecution must think they have a good case else they wouldn't have charged him in the first place.

Just because people can get a fancy lawyer and 12 people, who could potentially have the IQ of 3, find them not guilty, doesn't mean they aren't guilty.