Ulrika destroyed his career and sold her book and made a packet from it, and still never even said if it was him
Never liked her after that
Agreed. She behaved disgracefully in her own way and even he is guilty, her kind of behaviour makes it so much harder for rape victims to be taken seriously - more so than it already is.
Could never stand John Leslie, even when he was on Blue Peter. And I wouldn't watch him now if he was on telly.
But, he didn't deserve what happened to him. If Ulrika wanted to use the story to sell her book, she should have had the courage to nail her colours to the mast. By refusing to do so, she effectively consigned Leslie to be the fall guy - she didn't say it was him, but equally she didn't say it wasn't him. So he's left in limbo.
Having said all that I can understand why she wouldn't want to report any assault to the police. Can you imagine being a woman with 4 kids by 4 different men (it would have been 5 kids by 5 different men if she hadn't had a termination when she was with the Gladiator) and going into court!! The words "Field Day" spring to mind!
PS - I like Ulrika even less than I like John Leslie!!!
The alleged attack happened way before she was known as 4x4.
Ulrika Jonnson or however you spell her name sold a book which alleged she was raped and after which she would not even be in the same room as this man. She appeared on Big Breakfast flirting with John Leslie AFTER the alleged attack and seemed comfortable in his company, something she does not feel in the company of her alleged rapist to this day.
Some of you need to get off your high horses and read her book, for those of us who have then it is obvious it isn't John Leslie.
The man was a bit of a lad and probably still is, but I have had far uglier men throw themselves at me.
Ulrika Jonnson or however you spell her name sold a book which alleged she was raped and after which she would not even be in the same room as this man. She appeared on Big Breakfast flirting with John Leslie AFTER the alleged attack and seemed comfortable in his company, something she does not feel in the company of her alleged rapist to this day.
Some of you need to get off your high horses and read her book, for those of us who have then it is obvious it isn't John Leslie.
Yes, agree, which makes it even more puzzling as to why Ulrika never cleared that up publicly. It seemed very callous not to.
Could never stand John Leslie, even when he was on Blue Peter. And I wouldn't watch him now if he was on telly.
But, he didn't deserve what happened to him. If Ulrika wanted to use the story to sell her book, she should have had the courage to nail her colours to the mast. By refusing to do so, she effectively consigned Leslie to be the fall guy - she didn't say it was him, but equally she didn't say it wasn't him. So he's left in limbo.
Having said all that I can understand why she wouldn't want to report any assault to the police. Can you imagine being a woman with 4 kids by 4 different men (it would have been 5 kids by 5 different men if she hadn't had a termination when she was with the Gladiator) and going into court!! The words "Field Day" spring to mind!
PS - I like Ulrika even less than I like John Leslie!!!
Not that how many kids she has and by whom should make any difference to her right to report a rape, but I don't think she had any kids when the alleged incident took place.
weren't the reports against Savile brushed under the carpet with the victims being made to look like self serving trouble makers?
It seems that well liked TV celebs are always vehemently defended by their fans, regardless what they are alleged to have done.
I would not be so crass to say he is 100% guilty, I most definitely will not say he is innocent either...
Multiple complaints, cocaine and and rape allegations, that pattern fits a certain behavioural type.
However he is viewed by anyone here, he has 'served his time' in TV exile.
weren't the reports against Savile brushed under the carpet with the victims being made to look like self serving trouble makers?
It seems that well liked TV celebs are always vehemently defended by their fans, regardless what they are alleged to have done.
I would not be so crass to say he is 100% guilty, I most definitely will not say he is innocent either... Multiple complaints, cocaine and and rape allegations, that pattern fits a certain behavioural type.
However he is viewed by anyone here, he has 'served his time' in TV exile.
BIB - he went to court as a result of those and the case was dismissed by the judge.
I thought John Leslie's TV career was ruined when he got his willy out in that video with Abi Titmuss.
That hurt his public image for certain, but Angus Deayton was going through a similar thing at the same time, and his career eventually recovered. While there's no guarantee that Leslie would have gotten his career back on track, the whole rape thing killed any hope of him ever doing that.
BIB - he went to court as a result of those and the case was dismissed by the judge.
Justice is served to bias in favour of the person with the better legal team..
The notion of right and wrong in application within any UK courtroom is simply not of our culture.
Any judgement is therefore always open to scrutiny and extremely unfortunate.
Look at the sheer volume of celeb case acquittals where any regular person would be locked up... Whether drink driving with fatality, possession and supply of drugs, battery and thuggery as well as rape,racism and countless other forms of abuse.
weren't the reports against Savile brushed under the carpet with the victims being made to look like self serving trouble makers?
It seems that well liked TV celebs are always vehemently defended by their fans, regardless what they are alleged to have done.
I would not be so crass to say he is 100% guilty, I most definitely will not say he is innocent either...
Multiple complaints, cocaine and and rape allegations, that pattern fits a certain behavioural type.
However he is viewed by anyone here, he has 'served his time' in TV exile.
Good. Because that would be libellous.
He has certainly lived a colourful and chequered life with some serious errors of judgements but he has never been convicted of rape.
Ulrika Jonnson or however you spell her name sold a book which alleged she was raped and after which she would not even be in the same room as this man. She appeared on Big Breakfast flirting with John Leslie AFTER the alleged attack and seemed comfortable in his company, something she does not feel in the company of her alleged rapist to this day.
Some of you need to get off your high horses and read her book, for those of us who have then it is obvious it isn't John Leslie.
The man was a bit of a lad and probably still is, but I have had far uglier men throw themselves at me.
Then why the heck didn't she say it wasn't him? Her silence spoke volumes.
Most rapists are never sentenced, does that mean 96% of rape allegations are false ?
What percentage of cases that make to court are acquitted though? I can't believe it's 96%. In JL's case he was given the chance to defend himself in court and was found not guilty, with the judge even commenting that he should have no stai on his character. Our justice system is all wrong if even those cleared of all charges are still vilified and their careers ended.
What percentage of cases that make to court are acquitted though? I can't believe it's 96%. In JL's case he was given the chance to defend himself in court and was found not guilty, with the judge even commenting that he should have no stai on his character. Our justice system is all wrong if even those cleared of all charges are still vilified and their careers ended.
Unfortunately i was being generous with the stat..
only 11% of all rape cases are taken to court
about 10% of those result in a conviction
I find it somewhat ironic that in India a woman was brutally attacked, raped and murdered by 6 men, in spite of this blame has been put onto her as 'inviting the attack'.
It seems that justice for women experiencing abuse of all forms, especially rape is somewhat lacking, running close behind that is the public perception of what justice for victims of sexual assault actually is.
The journey continues...
Don't you find it odd that even today, Ulrika does not put him in the clear.
Oh hang on, best i get with the modern approach ;
Its her fault right?,
She was seeking attention?
She had it coming?
She has children of different fathers?
She is a blond? she is too skinny?
She flaunted herself?
She appeared on TV with him?
She has blue eyes?
She should have thicker skin...
And of course... he was being a lad, a charmer and just tried it on...
Glad someone said that. Wright named him live on television when the media were not naming anyone and he got off scot free. Shame lie TV does not have a five second delay button like 'live' radio does....
Unfortunately i was being generous with the stat..
only 11% of all rape cases are taken to court
about 10% of those result in a conviction
I find it somewhat ironic that in India a woman was brutally attacked, raped and murdered by 6 men, in spite of this blame has been put onto her as 'inviting the attack'.
It seems that justice for women experiencing abuse of all forms, especially rape is somewhat lacking, running close behind that is the public perception of what justice for victims of sexual assault actually is.
The journey continues...
Don't you find it odd that even today, Ulrika does not put him in the clear.
Oh hang on, best i get with the modern approach ;
Its her fault right?,
She was seeking attention?
She had it coming?
She has children of different fathers?
She is a blond? she is too skinny?
She flaunted herself?
She appeared on TV with him?
She has blue eyes?
She should have thicker skin...
And of course... he was being a lad, a charmer and just tried it on...
How we progress as a society ...
When you quoted the stat of 96% of rapists are not convicted, you actually should have said that 60% are not convicted. Nobody can be convicted of a crime that doesn't make it to court, and there are many reasons why they don't.
Actually we have progressed as a society - for example not too long ago it was legally impossible to rape your wife - thankfully that has changed and whilst it is probably still difficult to get a conviction at least there is the possibility of justice. There is still a long way to go but we are heading in the right direction IMO. But if rape cases are not reported at all then there is no possibility of justice.
And as for your comments regarding Ulrika I don't think anyone on here has said that she had it coming, it would be monstrous to think so, However as far as we know she never reported the rape and as a result nobody has been charged with or convicted of raping her. Therefore I would be careful with your comments about John Leslie.
Edit - sorry it's 58% of cases that make it to court that end in conviction not 60%
The alleged attack happened way before she was known as 4x4.
Rod Stewart or Mick Jagger are not spoken of in a derogatory manner because they each have a tribe of their own with various women...and Rod and Mick have only married one or two of their sperm vessels each. Ulrika has been married to 3 out of the 4 of her children's dads.
Agreed. She behaved disgracefully in her own way and even he is guilty, her kind of behaviour makes it so much harder for rape victims to be taken seriously - more so than it already is.
How did she destroy his career... She didn't name him..she didn't go after him the media did that.. She is the victim of a crime... She shouldn't be vilified
Unfortunately i was being generous with the stat..
only 11% of all rape cases are taken to court
about 10% of those result in a conviction
I find it somewhat ironic that in India a woman was brutally attacked, raped and murdered by 6 men, in spite of this blame has been put onto her as 'inviting the attack'.
It seems that justice for women experiencing abuse of all forms, especially rape is somewhat lacking, running close behind that is the public perception of what justice for victims of sexual assault actually is.
The journey continues...
Don't you find it odd that even today, Ulrika does not put him in the clear.
Oh hang on, best i get with the modern approach ;
Its her fault right?,
She was seeking attention?
She had it coming?
She has children of different fathers?
She is a blond? she is too skinny?
She flaunted herself? She appeared on TV with him?
She has blue eyes?
She should have thicker skin...
Actually that's pretty key.
A woman who was raped by a man, appearing a few months later on a TV show with him? Really? Not at all standing up for her principles or too terrified to appear but blithely chatting with him? I find that odd and a little unbelieveable (that she would be happy to be in the same room as him following a vicious attack).
& the fact that she never reported it is important too IMHO.
Your other points are merely obtuse and facetious so I shall ignore them.
Rod Stewart or Mick Jagger are not spoken of in a derogatory manner because they each have a tribe of their own with various women...and Rod and Mick have only married one or two of their sperm vessels each. Ulrika has been married to 3 out of the 4 of her children's dads.
I'm not disputing that. I was quoting another poster.
I really hate the double standards we have in society.. So she has 4 kids by different dads... That makes her a bad person does it? She was allegedly raped by someone and yet she is the one being made out to be the villain here
Ulrika Jonnson or however you spell her name sold a book which alleged she was raped and after which she would not even be in the same room as this man. She appeared on Big Breakfast flirting with John Leslie AFTER the alleged attack and seemed comfortable in his company, something she does not feel in the company of her alleged rapist to this day.
Some of you need to get off your high horses and read her book, for those of us who have then it is obvious it isn't John Leslie.
The man was a bit of a lad and probably still is, but I have had far uglier men throw themselves at me.
Ulrika appears apparently at ease and almost flirtatious as she chats with her alleged attacker during a television interview.
What makes the pictures so poignant for Leslie is that they were recorded after the rape is alleged to have taken place, at a time Ulrika says she had shunned him.
Ulrika claims that for 14 years she 'blanked' her attacker and held him in 'total disdain'. But in the interview - recorded for Channel 4's The Big Breakfast in 1993, five years after she says the rape happened - Ulrika is seen teasing Leslie about his love life and poking fun at the Scottish presenter over his career.
A source close to Leslie said last night: 'John is adamant he never raped Ulrika. He is not planning to say anything until the police investigation is over, but this footage can only help his plight.
'If he did rape Ulrika, surely she would never agree to an interview? She would not even be able to be in the same room as him, let alone pry about his sex life.' A spokesman for John Leslie said: 'John Leslie's lawyers have obtained a copy of the tape and the footage is under close scrutiny. They believe …
Comments
Agreed. She behaved disgracefully in her own way and even he is guilty, her kind of behaviour makes it so much harder for rape victims to be taken seriously - more so than it already is.
The alleged attack happened way before she was known as 4x4.
Some of you need to get off your high horses and read her book, for those of us who have then it is obvious it isn't John Leslie.
The man was a bit of a lad and probably still is, but I have had far uglier men throw themselves at me.
Yes, agree, which makes it even more puzzling as to why Ulrika never cleared that up publicly. It seemed very callous not to.
Why won't the silly mere come out and say it herself then?
Not that how many kids she has and by whom should make any difference to her right to report a rape, but I don't think she had any kids when the alleged incident took place.
It seems that well liked TV celebs are always vehemently defended by their fans, regardless what they are alleged to have done.
I would not be so crass to say he is 100% guilty, I most definitely will not say he is innocent either...
Multiple complaints, cocaine and and rape allegations, that pattern fits a certain behavioural type.
However he is viewed by anyone here, he has 'served his time' in TV exile.
BIB - he went to court as a result of those and the case was dismissed by the judge.
That hurt his public image for certain, but Angus Deayton was going through a similar thing at the same time, and his career eventually recovered. While there's no guarantee that Leslie would have gotten his career back on track, the whole rape thing killed any hope of him ever doing that.
Justice is served to bias in favour of the person with the better legal team..
The notion of right and wrong in application within any UK courtroom is simply not of our culture.
Any judgement is therefore always open to scrutiny and extremely unfortunate.
Look at the sheer volume of celeb case acquittals where any regular person would be locked up... Whether drink driving with fatality, possession and supply of drugs, battery and thuggery as well as rape,racism and countless other forms of abuse.
Good. Because that would be libellous.
He has certainly lived a colourful and chequered life with some serious errors of judgements but he has never been convicted of rape.
Then why the heck didn't she say it wasn't him? Her silence spoke volumes.
Probably because it suited her actual rapist - and possibly her - much better that attention was diverted elsewhere?
Most rapists are never sentenced, does that mean 96% of rape allegations are false ?
What percentage of cases that make to court are acquitted though? I can't believe it's 96%. In JL's case he was given the chance to defend himself in court and was found not guilty, with the judge even commenting that he should have no stai on his character. Our justice system is all wrong if even those cleared of all charges are still vilified and their careers ended.
Unfortunately i was being generous with the stat..
only 11% of all rape cases are taken to court
about 10% of those result in a conviction
I find it somewhat ironic that in India a woman was brutally attacked, raped and murdered by 6 men, in spite of this blame has been put onto her as 'inviting the attack'.
It seems that justice for women experiencing abuse of all forms, especially rape is somewhat lacking, running close behind that is the public perception of what justice for victims of sexual assault actually is.
The journey continues...
Don't you find it odd that even today, Ulrika does not put him in the clear.
Oh hang on, best i get with the modern approach ;
Its her fault right?,
She was seeking attention?
She had it coming?
She has children of different fathers?
She is a blond? she is too skinny?
She flaunted herself?
She appeared on TV with him?
She has blue eyes?
She should have thicker skin...
And of course... he was being a lad, a charmer and just tried it on...
How we progress as a society ...
Glad someone said that. Wright named him live on television when the media were not naming anyone and he got off scot free. Shame lie TV does not have a five second delay button like 'live' radio does....
When you quoted the stat of 96% of rapists are not convicted, you actually should have said that 60% are not convicted. Nobody can be convicted of a crime that doesn't make it to court, and there are many reasons why they don't.
Actually we have progressed as a society - for example not too long ago it was legally impossible to rape your wife - thankfully that has changed and whilst it is probably still difficult to get a conviction at least there is the possibility of justice. There is still a long way to go but we are heading in the right direction IMO. But if rape cases are not reported at all then there is no possibility of justice.
And as for your comments regarding Ulrika I don't think anyone on here has said that she had it coming, it would be monstrous to think so, However as far as we know she never reported the rape and as a result nobody has been charged with or convicted of raping her. Therefore I would be careful with your comments about John Leslie.
Edit - sorry it's 58% of cases that make it to court that end in conviction not 60%
Rod Stewart or Mick Jagger are not spoken of in a derogatory manner because they each have a tribe of their own with various women...and Rod and Mick have only married one or two of their sperm vessels each. Ulrika has been married to 3 out of the 4 of her children's dads.
How did she destroy his career... She didn't name him..she didn't go after him the media did that.. She is the victim of a crime... She shouldn't be vilified
I'm not disputing that. I was quoting another poster.
Ulrika appears apparently at ease and almost flirtatious as she chats with her alleged attacker during a television interview.
What makes the pictures so poignant for Leslie is that they were recorded after the rape is alleged to have taken place, at a time Ulrika says she had shunned him.
Ulrika claims that for 14 years she 'blanked' her attacker and held him in 'total disdain'. But in the interview - recorded for Channel 4's The Big Breakfast in 1993, five years after she says the rape happened - Ulrika is seen teasing Leslie about his love life and poking fun at the Scottish presenter over his career.
A source close to Leslie said last night: 'John is adamant he never raped Ulrika. He is not planning to say anything until the police investigation is over, but this footage can only help his plight.
'If he did rape Ulrika, surely she would never agree to an interview? She would not even be able to be in the same room as him, let alone pry about his sex life.' A spokesman for John Leslie said: 'John Leslie's lawyers have obtained a copy of the tape and the footage is under close scrutiny. They believe …
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-93897492.html