Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Stuart Hall admits 14 sexual assaults...


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-05-2013, 11:33
yorkiegal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: beautiful York
Posts: 17,427
I wonder why restrictions were put on reporting this until now if he pled guilty weeks ago.
yorkiegal is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 02-05-2013, 11:35
Betty Britain
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,556
Apparently the parents knew of what had happened at the time but didn't report it to the police. That's quite shocking. Their silence might have allowed him to abuse more children.
If that's true..then shame on those parents for not supporting heir child and reporting these crimes..
Betty Britain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:37
stargazer61
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Dirty thirty and proud!
Posts: 46,233
I wonder why restrictions were put on reporting this until now if he pled guilty weeks ago.
I suspect it was because discussions were going on as to whether the woman alleging rape wanted to continue with the case. if he pleaded guilty to the other offences, then she may have decided that justice will be served for those offences and that she does not wish to put herself through the trauma of a trial
stargazer61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:39
stargazer61
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Dirty thirty and proud!
Posts: 46,233
If that's true..then shame on those parents for not supporting heir child and reporting these crimes..
Read my post #17

What may be considered to be a sexual assault today and dealt with as a crime, was often viewed differently 50 years ago. Things were just different!
stargazer61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:46
End-Em-All
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,770
Read my post #17

What may be considered to be a sexual assault today and dealt with as a crime, was often viewed differently 50 years ago. Things were just different!
But we don't afford the police those sorts of "excuses" so why is it ok for the parents and other associates who kept quiet at the time? Police who took no action in those days are now facing accusations of a cover-up and IMO the same applies to some parents.
End-Em-All is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:48
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 42,290
It just shows that those who say it is impossible to prove anything in a court of law that may have happened decades ago may be barking up the wrong tree. Witness testimony can be powerful evidence and those other prominent people who we've heard about in recent days and weeks may be in serious trouble.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:49
NP73
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 231
Perhaps, some of those parents should also be prosecuted for failing to report a crime.
Failing to report a crime isn't actually a crime in itself (except in a few specific circumstances).
NP73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:51
stargazer61
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Dirty thirty and proud!
Posts: 46,233
But we don't afford the police those sorts of "excuses" so why is it ok for the parents and other associates who kept quiet at the time? Police who took no action in those days are now facing accusations of a cover-up and IMO the same applies to some parents.
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?
stargazer61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:51
Jo March
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,793
And it may well be that , at the time, they did not tell their parents, or the parents did not believe them, or the parents spoke to Mr Hall about his behaviour and felt the warning was sufficient, or (as the complainants did not know each other) felt that this was a 'one off event' and would not happen again. Plus....times were very different in the 60's and 70's - it may well be that many parents did not then consider it was a criminal act
He's lucky one of the fathers didn't punch him if they knew.
Jo March is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:51
Charlottesweb
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 17,472
But we don't afford the police those sorts of "excuses" so why is it ok for the parents and other associates who kept quiet at the time? Police who took no action in those days are now facing accusations of a cover-up and IMO the same applies to some parents.
You also have to remember the way these things would be investigated back then were vastly different.

Parents were perhaps reluctant to put young children through the intense grilling and questioning that was the polices modus operandi at the time, and such is the cult of celebrity, we are talking of people who were household names at the time, the worry of being made out to be liars.
Charlottesweb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:53
yorkiegal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: beautiful York
Posts: 17,427
Sky News must be all of a dither right now. They don't know whether to hang around Bill Roache's house or nip over to Stuart Hall's which is presumably why they aren't doing their usual 24/7 blanket coverage of the story but limiting it to a line on their ticker.
yorkiegal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:54
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 42,290
They really must have had some cast iron evidence against him for him to produce such an about turn in the space of 2 months. If I was one of the other celebrities accused/charged of similar historical offences recently I would be even more worried now.

PD Did they also search Stuart Hall's home when he was arrested?
Evidence doesn't even have to be "cast iron". If you can go onto the stand in a courtroom and say 'so and so did this to me' and are a strong and compelling witness under cross examination from the defence, then that may be enough to convince a jury (which may be very bad news for the other celebs).
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:54
End-Em-All
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,770
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. Maybe not.
End-Em-All is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:55
stargazer61
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Dirty thirty and proud!
Posts: 46,233
He's lucky one of the fathers didn't punch him if they knew.
They may well have done for all we know! And then felt that they had taken sufficient action
stargazer61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:55
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 42,290
You also have to remember the way these things would be investigated back then were vastly different.

Parents were perhaps reluctant to put young children through the intense grilling and questioning that was the polices modus operandi at the time, and such is the cult of celebrity, we are talking of people who were household names at the time, the worry of being made out to be liars.
Also, there was no culture of reporting this type of sexual abuse back then. The police would not have been your first port of call....far from it in fact.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:55
Yvie123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 809
I'm really shocked by this, especially as he was so adamant a few weeks back that he'd clear his name.
I hadn't realised that these charges referred to children either - there are so many arrests and allegations flying around right now, it's hard to keep track of who is supposed to have done what, but this is shocking and horrific - it makes me feel like the world of TV and Celebrity has been a hiding place for some awful people over the past few decades
Yvie123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:57
Jessica_H
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Staffordshire
Posts: 13
Read my post #17

What may be considered to be a sexual assault today and dealt with as a crime, was often viewed differently 50 years ago. Things were just different!
It was definitely different then - when I was about 8 or 9 an old man started talking to me when I was watching the animals at a local cattle market (somehow we had become separated from the others). I was too young to understand what he was talking about and wasn't sure what to do - respect your elders etc. Fortunately one of the farmers saw him and warned him off. I told no one as I felt stupid but when my dad got home it was obvious the farmer had spoken to him and he was furious. He quizzed me to find out who it was and what he'd said then 'took off' with my mother shouting after him to be careful. I doubt that old man would risk anything like that again!!
Jessica_H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:58
End-Em-All
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,770
Also, there was no culture of reporting this type of sexual abuse back then. The police would not have been your first port of call....far from it in fact.
Are you saying these sort of abuses where not reported or prosecuted in those days? None at all?
End-Em-All is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:58
smc81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 787
It just shows that those who say it is impossible to prove anything in a court of law that may have happened decades ago may be barking up the wrong tree. Witness testimony can be powerful evidence and those other prominent people who we've heard about in recent days and weeks may be in serious trouble.
It was more likely to be a guilty conscience that made Hall confess rather than any testimony.
smc81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:59
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 42,290
I'm really shocked by this, especially as he was so adamant a few weeks back that he'd clear his name.
I hadn't realised that these charges referred to children either - there are so many arrests and allegations flying around right now, it's hard to keep track of who is supposed to have done what, but this is shocking and horrific - it makes me feel like the world of TV and Celebrity has been a hiding place for some awful people over the past few decades
I think this is a watershed moment in these historical sexual abuse cases involving celebs.

A well known person was accused of sexual offences dating back many decades and has now admitted it......I'd say the other celebs who are under a cloud must be in a state of blind panic after today's developments.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 12:01
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 42,290
It was more likely to be a guilty conscience that made Hall confess rather than any testimony.
Perhaps, or the prospect of having to face his accusers in court which would perhaps be even more damaging to him as a person than even admitting it right now.
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 12:02
End-Em-All
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,770
It was definitely different then - when I was about 8 or 9 an old man started talking to me when I was watching the animals at a local cattle market (somehow we had become separated from the others). I was too young to understand what he was talking about and wasn't sure what to do - respect your elders etc. Fortunately one of the farmers saw him and warned him off. I told no one as I felt stupid but when my dad got home it was obvious the farmer had spoken to him and he was furious. He quizzed me to find out who it was and what he'd said then 'took off' with my mother shouting after him to be careful. I doubt that old man would risk anything like that again!!
But these things are still happening to this very day. Only recently, a man was convicted for inappropriately touching two minors in a supermarket.
End-Em-All is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 12:02
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 66,755
His Barrister released a statement saying he is sorry for what he has done.

Sorry he got caught more likely.
Yeah. If he was sorry, he would have owned up to what he did before it came out now. This is just pure expensive lawyer talk. An absolute load of rubbish! I bet he would have stayed quiet until the day he died if this never came out. It's very hard to believe that he's being truthful here.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 12:04
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 42,290
Are you saying these sort of abuses where not reported or prosecuted in those days? None at all?
I wouldn't go that far, but certainly cases involving groping or touching or other inappropriate behaviour rarely if ever were reported to the police.....usually the parents would handle it other ways (report the guy to his superiors or whatever).
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 12:06
jjne
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,332
A well known person was accused of sexual offences dating back many decades and has now admitted it......I'd say the other celebs who are under a cloud must be in a state of blind panic after today's developments.
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?
jjne is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:49.