Why isn't Bill Wyman in jail with Gary Glitter, Stuart Hall, Rolf Harris, etc?

13

Comments

  • nitenursenitenurse Posts: 1,116
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    So as long as it is consensual a middle aged guy can diddle a 13 year old?:(

    There seems a lot of hypocrisy around this kind of thing imo. Ok it's not like Glitter or Harris etc BUT it is still very creepy and the girl was underage. He was in his 40s!!
    What is even more creepy is that people always try to use the fact that Mandy was sexually precoucious, as if that is a mitigating circumstance. 'Oh well, she was hot and coming on to me so.....you know. Yes I know she was 13 but....' why bother having an age of consent at all if some rich folk can get away with it like this. cause I can promise you that ordinary people wouldn't so easily. It is like that other creep Polanski, you get all the top Hollywood actors supporting him, and making excuses for him, because the girl was up for it, so that makes it ok! Sorry what???>:(

    Polanski is an entirely different kettle of fish. He drugged, raped, and sodomized his 13 year old

    For a while a few in Hollywood supported him due to his "tragic" past, WWII and the murder of Sharon Tate and his unborn child were frequently touted in the media.

    Support for him isn't there and more than a few felt he should have returned and dealt with the charges decades ago
  • ResonanceResonance Posts: 16,644
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Cryolemon wrote: »
    It still is a defence (see section 9 of the sex offences act). I'd be interested in what a jury would consider reasonable these days though.

    Ah right, didn't know that.

    I suppose something along the lines of a 15 year old that looks much older, met in a nightclub (so assumed 18+), where a one night stand follows, then a jury might consider it 'reasonable' that she/he could be assumed to be over the age of consent?

    I also didn't know this......

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/9
    A person aged 18 or over (A) commits an offence if—

    (a)he intentionally touches another person (B),

    (b)the touching is sexual, and

    (c)either—

    (i)B is under 16 and A does not reasonably believe that B is 16 or over, or

    (ii)B is under 13.

    That reads to me like a 17 year old (or younger) can legally have sex with someone of any age :confused:

    I'm guessing there must be another section to cover that?
  • zx50zx50 Posts: 91,269
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Cryolemon wrote: »
    That wasn't actually illegal at the time was it? It would be now, but I don't think it was until fairly recently.

    So fellas were allowed to have sex with lasses below 16 over here back then?
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    zx50 wrote: »
    So fellas were allowed to have sex with lasses below 16 over here back then?
    No, only in countries where with a lower age of consent. If Wyman took Smith and her mother somewhere where the age was 13/14, then maybe he wouldn't have been breaking the law at that time?
  • CryolemonCryolemon Posts: 8,670
    Forum Member
    Resonance wrote: »
    Ah right, didn't know that.

    I suppose something along the lines of a 15 year old that looks much older, met in a nightclub (so assumed 18+), where a one night stand follows, then a jury might consider it 'reasonable' that she/he could be assumed to be over the age of consent?

    That is certainly how I would see, and I would think a lot of people would too.
    Resonance wrote: »
    I'm guessing there must be another section to cover that?

    I'm fairly sure there is, yes. Essentially the only difference is in the sentencing I think.
    No, only in countries where with a lower age of consent. If Wyman took Smith and her mother somewhere where the age was 13/14, then maybe he wouldn't have been breaking the law at that time?

    That was my assumption. So you could have gone to say Spain (where the age of consent used to be 13, I think they raised it or added caveats about age difference recently) and you wouldn't have been breaking the law, but if you did it now it would be illegal whatever the age of consent where you are.

    I'm not 100% certain, but the wording of the law would seem to imply that a British citizen can be prosecuted for having sex with any girl who's under 16 regardless of the local age of consent. I suspect it wouldn't be used like that though, unless it was an obvious sex tourism case.
  • d'@ved'@ve Posts: 45,526
    Forum Member
    Resonance wrote: »
    Ah right, didn't know that.

    I suppose something along the lines of a 15 year old that looks much older, met in a nightclub (so assumed 18+), where a one night stand follows, then a jury might consider it 'reasonable' that she/he could be assumed to be over the age of consent?

    I also didn't know this......

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/9

    That reads to me like a 17 year old (or younger) can legally have sex with someone of any age :confused:

    I'm guessing there must be another section to cover that?

    Yep...
    13. Child sex offences committed by children or young persons

    (1)A person under 18 commits an offence if he does anything which would be an offence under any of sections 9 to 12 if he were aged 18.

    (2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—

    (a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;

    (b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years.
  • Rose*~*Rose*~* Posts: 7,008
    Forum Member
    Rightly or wrongly, the fact that it was consensual plays a big part in this. If a woman walks into a police station and says "a man had sex with me when i was 14, although i did consent" the chances of it being pursued are very slim

    I think you'll find that by law, an underage child cannot consent to sex.
    Shame her parents didn't protect her.
  • CryolemonCryolemon Posts: 8,670
    Forum Member
    Rose*~* wrote: »
    I think you'll find that by law, an underage child cannot consent to sex.

    If that was the case then all underage sex would be rape, which legally it isn't.
  • Nobby BurtonNobby Burton Posts: 1,869
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Do people think the police deliberately make work for themselves?

    If you want an accurate portrayal of how they view cases, watch The Wire

    They investigate something if a complaint is made. If it isn't, they don't
  • andy1231andy1231 Posts: 5,100
    Forum Member
    Do people think the police deliberately make work for themselves?

    If you want an accurate portrayal of how they view cases, watch The Wire

    They investigate something if a complaint is made. If it isn't, they don't

    With all due respect, speaking from over 26 years Police experience I can catagorically say that is not true.
  • Kat 68Kat 68 Posts: 426
    Forum Member
    mklass wrote: »
    Mandys mum married Bill son so i don't think it is likely that she will come back now and make any complaints about him!.......

    No she didn't! Mandy married Bill and the mother had a relationship with Bills son I think.
  • Rose*~*Rose*~* Posts: 7,008
    Forum Member
    I'm old enough to remember this as 'news'. It certainly was reported as 'scandal' at the time and not something that was in any sense condoned.

    Me too. And old enough to remember this video, where at 3:52 it says 'Bill call Mandy' on the wall. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pkVLqSaahk
  • zx50zx50 Posts: 91,269
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No, only in countries where with a lower age of consent. If Wyman took Smith and her mother somewhere where the age was 13/14, then maybe he wouldn't have been breaking the law at that time?

    Yeah, that's what I said earlier on. I'm guessing her mother turned a blind eye to what would be illegal in this country and in return, she got free holidays.
  • MaxatoriaMaxatoria Posts: 17,980
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I know many men are turned on by school girl uniforms. Even when worn by mature women this is problematic as it hints at darker desires.

    We're getting to a point where 2 people dressed up for a bit of fun who are both WELL over the age of consent having a bit of a role play fun now need to both end up on the sex offenders register since one had a mortar and a cloak while the other had a white shirt/grey jumper and a short skirt with pig tails........might as well make it death to do it any other way than the missonary position with the lights off.

    but as for Bill he's fine, sure he's been to plod and said you want to do anything and they're not interested and with all the media stuff around it would be an easy thing to prove without either of them giving evidence so why some plod can't get a promotion off this as it'll probably be easier than proving a 120 in a 30 zone escapes me as they did that footballer for rape and there was no complainant.
  • puffenstuffpuffenstuff Posts: 1,069
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    For prosecuting historical sexual offences they must be in relation to the law at that time, not now, you can't apply new or updated laws to offences which happened beforehand. Mentioning names Jimmy Paige slept with 14 yr old groupie be be bell ( can't spell name)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 10,188
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What an episode of Porridge that would have made.
  • puffenstuffpuffenstuff Posts: 1,069
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I knew I had the name wrong it was Jimmy Paige and Lori mattix something like that anyway
  • Mr DosMr Dos Posts: 3,637
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Different times. Anyone remember the topless pubescent girl on the Blind Faith album ? Or the Stones 'Stray Cat Blues' about underage groupies ? Mind you, this artwork about Mick + co from those days says a lot

    http://s10.postimg.org/phjasombt/stones.jpg

    by Guy Peellaert - more here
    http://www.billet-haj.dk/page44.html
  • zx50zx50 Posts: 91,269
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mr Dos wrote: »
    Different times. Anyone remember the topless pubescent girl on the Blind Faith album ? Or the Stones 'Stray Cat Blues' about underage groupies ? Mind you, this artwork about Mick + co from those days says a lot

    http://s10.postimg.org/phjasombt/stones.jpg

    by Guy Peellaert - more here
    http://www.billet-haj.dk/page44.html

    I can't understand why people didn't kick up a fuss back then over that album cover, if they didn't. I suppose there's a lot of very dodgy album covers out there from the past.
  • bryemycazbryemycaz Posts: 11,737
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    zx50 wrote: »
    I can't understand why people didn't kick up a fuss back then over that album cover, if they didn't. I suppose there's a lot of very dodgy album covers out there from the past.

    They did.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Faith_(Blind_Faith_album)

    America refused to have it on display so they changed to cover to a picture of the band. I have that album as the music is great but I have turned the cover inside out to show the American cover as I do not like that image.

    The girl in question was paid £40 to do the shot. She asked for a Horse but did not get one.

    Actually this one is tamer than the Scorpions Virgin Killer album.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer
  • dd68dd68 Posts: 17,841
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'm guessing because Mandy Smith never pressed charges, in fact her 'career' was founded on it.
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,986
    Forum Member
    dd68 wrote: »
    I'm guessing because Mandy Smith never pressed charges, in fact her 'career' was founded on it.

    That seems to have been the case.

    Old newspapers state they were 'dating' nothing more.

    In Aug 1986 Mandy did an interview in which she stated when aged 13 she had been Bill Wyman's 'lover'. At the time the police interviewed Mandy Smith and I think Bill Wyman it was later stated she meant they had been in love rather than physical lovers.
  • ElCantoDelLocoElCantoDelLoco Posts: 6,637
    Forum Member
    As others have said, it *did* create a big scandal then and I think a lot of people were surprised that he wasn't prosecuted, times weren't that different, but I think it would be wrong if the police went after him now, being as it was known about then and not new info which has just come forward.
  • Gusto BruntGusto Brunt Posts: 12,351
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mr Dos wrote: »
    Different times. Anyone remember the topless pubescent girl on the Blind Faith album ? Or the Stones 'Stray Cat Blues' about underage groupies ? Mind you, this artwork about Mick + co from those days says a lot

    http://s10.postimg.org/phjasombt/stones.jpg

    by Guy Peellaert - more here
    http://www.billet-haj.dk/page44.html

    That album cover is revolting.:o
  • Glawster2002Glawster2002 Posts: 15,211
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    bryemycaz wrote: »
    They did.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Faith_(Blind_Faith_album)

    America refused to have it on display so they changed to cover to a picture of the band. I have that album as the music is great but I have turned the cover inside out to show the American cover as I do not like that image.

    The girl in question was paid £40 to do the shot. She asked for a Horse but did not get one.

    Actually this one is tamer than the Scorpions Virgin Killer album.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer

    The Scorpions always hated that album cover and asked for it to be changed as it wasn't representative of the song the album derived its name from. They used the phrase "Virgin Killer" to mean someone who kills for the first time, not to mean a killer of virgins which is what the album cover implies.
Sign In or Register to comment.