Stuart Hall admits 14 sexual assaults...

1356718

Comments

  • stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 70,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    End-Em-All wrote: »
    Are you saying these sort of abuses where not reported or prosecuted in those days? None at all?

    Of couse not! But.. many people dealt with things then considered to be more 'minor' things themselves directly and did not go to the police.
  • jiroosjiroos Posts: 15,212
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    perhaps because some of the parents did not believe their children? Or because they spoke to Mr Hall and felt that that was sufficient. Or they felt it was a 'one-off incident, not realising that it had happened to other children, and that they had dealt with it sufficiently. Or they thought it was not serious enough to take to the police? Or they felt that the trauma of their child having to make a police statement woulld have made things worse? or they did report it, and no action was taken as it was not, at the time, considered serious enough to warrant further action?

    Maybe the parents listened to the pleas of their children as they begged them not to tell anyone. Doing something (even the wrong thing) in the name of loving your child...is that such a bad thing?
  • gulliverfoylegulliverfoyle Posts: 6,318
    Forum Member
    it was obvious as he was charged almost immediately

    so i would say the rozzers found stuff on his computer?

    unlike DLT Max Jim davison etc who've been bailed for months on end
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jjne wrote: »
    I would think the "blind panic" would be dependent upon their guilt, don't you?

    Unless you're suggesting that an innocent party could (should?) be convicted based on similar evidence?

    Of course and we have no idea at the moment which celebs may or may not be guilty of anything.

    But any of them who were up to no good have every reason to be fearful.
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    it was obvious as he was charged almost immediately

    so i would say the rozzers found stuff on his computer?

    unlike DLT Max Jim davison etc who've been bailed for months on end

    Don't think so as they would surely charge have charged him with pornography offences.
  • jiroosjiroos Posts: 15,212
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    it was obvious as he was charged almost immediately

    That spells bad news for old Bill Roache then...
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    These people got away with their crimes for so long because many people including parents and assorted acquaintances failed to take the appropriate action. In some cases, it was the police who failed to take action. Think about the victims who reported the abuses at the time who were dismissed and now only getting justice several decades later.
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Of couse not! But.. many people dealt with things then considered to be more 'minor' things themselves directly and did not go to the police.

    And still do to this day!
  • stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 70,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    End-Em-All wrote: »
    And still do to this day!

    Of course.
  • jjnejjne Posts: 6,580
    Forum Member
    Eurostar wrote: »
    Of course and we have no idea at the moment which celebs may or may not be guilty of anything.

    But any of them who were up to no good have every reason to be fearful.

    Fair enough, and agreed.
    jiroos wrote: »
    That spells bad news for old Bill Roache then...

    Being charged as quickly as that suggests that evidence in this case may be readily available, so you may not be far off the mark.
  • HotgossipHotgossip Posts: 22,385
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Dirty old pervert. He should be stripped of his title immediately.
  • alcockellalcockell Posts: 25,160
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well- into the vault or even into the bit-bucket go all the old Jeux Sans Frontieres footage..
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    End-Em-All wrote: »
    These people got away with their crimes for so long because many people including parents and assorted acquaintances failed to take the appropriate action. In some cases, it was the police who failed to take action. Think about the victims who reported the abuses at the time who were dismissed and now only getting justice several decades later.

    In their defence though, there was less understanding about child abuse and how to deal with it. People certainly knew it was very wrong, but when confronted it with, they were perplexed and unsure what to do next, as there was no culture of ringing the police first and reporting it.
  • CarlLewisCarlLewis Posts: 6,222
    Forum Member
    jiroos wrote: »
    Maybe the parents listened to the pleas of their children as they begged them not to tell anyone. Doing something (even the wrong thing) in the name of loving your child...is that such a bad thing?

    Indeed.
    Even if he had been found guilty at the time, I'm sure the words "she led me on" would have been used.

    I can see why parents might want to spare their children from that slur.
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Eurostar wrote: »
    In their defence though, there was less understanding about child abuse and how to deal with it. People certainly knew it was very wrong, but when confronted it with, they were perplexed and unsure what to do next, as there was no culture of ringing the police first and reporting it.

    I don't agree as the same thing still happens to this day!
  • stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 70,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    End-Em-All wrote: »
    These people got away with their crimes for so long because many people including parents and assorted acquaintances failed to take the appropriate action. In some cases, it was the police who failed to take action. Think about the victims who reported the abuses at the time who were dismissed and now only getting justice several decades later.

    And many people may have felt that they did take appropriate action AT THE TIME. What may be considered to be appropriate action today may have been viewed very differently 50 years ago.Almost everything was viewed differently......if you misbehaved as a child and were given a clip round the ear by the local bobby, you'd get another one from your dad. Try that today, and both the officer and the parent would end up in court!
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CarlLewis wrote: »
    Indeed.
    Even if he had been found guilty at the time, I'm sure the words "she led me on" would have been used.

    I can see why parents might want to spare their children from that slur.

    What about the kids who wanted the crime investigated? Janet Street-Porter recently revealed she reported abuse to her mother who just dismissed her. She looked visibly upset as she retold the story. It would appear some parents are more concerned about the effect on themselves of telling than on their abused kids.
  • stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 70,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jiroos wrote: »
    Maybe the parents listened to the pleas of their children as they begged them not to tell anyone. Doing something (even the wrong thing) in the name of loving your child...is that such a bad thing?

    and maybe some of the parents said 'don't be daft, you must have imagined it'
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    And many people may have felt that they did take appropriate action AT THE TIME. What may be considered to be appropriate action today may have been viewed very differently 50 years ago.Almost everything was viewed differently......if you misbehaved as a child and were given a clip round the ear by the local bobby, you'd get another one from your dad. Try that today, and both the officer and the parent would end up in court!

    Many, perhaps, but not all! Stop making excuses.
  • grahamzxygrahamzxy Posts: 11,920
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jiroos wrote: »
    Honestly. I only went on the site to see if there was any update on the Bill Roache case...only to be confronted with this "breaking news".

    What is this world really coming to??

    Sadly there have always been sexual predators - nothing has really changed, the 1960's were a terrible time, children were not (and still are not always) believed - many people got away with heinous crimes, it is not a modern phenomenon. Often the parents are culpable also - lack of parental care or understanding and believe of their children.

    That being said Stuart Hall was always a bit 'out there' - he was our local BBC NW newsreader for years.
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    and maybe some of the parents said 'don't be daft, you must have imagined it'

    Even worse, the children were sometimes accused of lying. In the Irish Catholic abuse cases, it was so unthinkable to the parents that a priest could be capable of such things that the only conclusion they come come to was that the child was lying and on occasion they were even beaten as a result.

    Clearly those parents were profoundly ignorant people but that's the way much of society was back then.
  • stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 70,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    End-Em-All wrote: »
    Many, perhaps, but not all! Stop making excuses.

    I am NOT making excuses in any way and quite resent that allegation. I grew up in the sixties and the cultural outlook was very, very different then. There are many reasons why people did not report and still do not report what is considered to be a reportable crime nowadays. There is a huge difference between making excuses and offering a range of valid reasons. It is simply impossible to transpose the way people thought in the past and the way things are viewed today...as others have also pointed out.
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I am NOT making excuses in any way and quite resent that allegation. I grew up in the sixties and the cultural outlook was very, very different then. There are many reasons why people did not report and still do not report what is considered to be a reportable crime nowadays. There is a huge difference between making excuses and offering a range of valid reasons. It is simply impossible to transpose the way people thought in the past and the way things are viewed today...as others have also pointed out.

    The problem with your argument is that the SAME thing happens to this very day.
  • stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 70,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Eurostar wrote: »
    Even worse, the children were sometimes accused of lying. In the Irish Catholic abuse cases, it was so unthinkable to the parents that a priest could be capable of such things that the only conclusion they come come to was that the child was lying and on occasion they were even beaten as a result.

    Clearly those parents were profoundly ignorant people but that's the way much of society was back then.

    and that is the salient point 'it was unthinkable'.

    and, and before I get accused of making excuses again, children do lie...they always have done, and they always will do...it is part of growing up. I am not suggesting that any of these children did lie, but, coupled with other factors, many were not believed.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 81
    Forum Member
    Bye Stuart

    Enjoy the rest of your life in prison.

    if the offences were treated as single offences there would be no prison, I am still not convinced he will get custody, otherwise I would have expected that today
Sign In or Register to comment.