So what was more exciting, as you imply, about the era that followed them?
Affordable foreign travel, greater access to higher education (generally involving leaving home), equal opportunities leading to higher disposable income for women, post-industrialisation also encouraged more mobility and opportunity.
Of course all these things didn't just happen on Jan 1st 1980 but the contrast between life expectations at the end of the '60s and now is quite marked imho.
So nobody has bothered to understand the context of his blog post seemingly, some of the insults to him are quite disturbing.
If he had done anything illegal would he blog about it ?Jeez.
paedophilia isn't hereditary ...whatever other members of his family have done doesn't mean he's guilty of it too
sleeping with WILLING groupies who you understand to be over the age of consent is very different to some of the genuine abuse that's being investigated
paedophilia isn't hereditary ...whatever other members of his family have done doesn't mean he's guilty of it too
sleeping with WILLING groupies who you understand to be over the age of consent is very different to some of the genuine abuse that's being investigated
paedophilia isn't hereditary ...whatever other members of his family have done doesn't mean he's guilty of it too
sleeping with WILLING groupies who you understand to be over the age of consent is very different to some of the genuine abuse that's being investigated
He didn't sleep with her nor did his brother sleep with the girl mentioned in that article. The difference is his brother would have probably raped her even knowing her age. Daniels stopped things going further as soon as he knew her age. Its very telling how mud sticks regarding him being related to a paedo and why he felt the need to make this statement on his blog, it just wreaks of a man that wanted to get his story across before the girl comes forward because of his brother. I doubt she will even come forward so he didn't really need to write it.
his brother's conviction had nothing to do with rape or sleeping with an under aged girl so you should be careful what you're saying/accusing people of
Did PD decide to 'share' his exploits as an insurance policy against 'Paedogeddon', or, was he just having a bit of a retrospective boast? Either way, bleeeee :eek:
his brother's conviction had nothing to do with rape or sleeping with an under aged girl so you should be careful what you're saying/accusing people of
Because it says that the girl escaped, so oh dear that's what I assume. If it was just a kiss and it went no further then there would be no reason to use the word escape
Because it says that the girl escaped, so oh dear that's what I assume. If it was just a kiss and it went no further then there would be no reason to use the word escape
seriously?
escaped doesn't have to be from being raped .... you can escape from being pinned against a door and unwillingly kissed too you know
Prosecutor Andrew Wilkins told magistrates: “He grabbed the girl, pushed her against the door and kissed her on the lips but she escaped from him
It just goes to show that there are some absolutely sick, vile creatures out there..... who would actually want to be a groupie to Paul Daniels?
Proof that virtually any celebrity could pull back then, no matter how aesthetically "challenged" they were.
Then again these celebs never actually reveal if the groupies were attractive or not. Maybe they'd be the type of girl you or I would turn down, even without being a celeb.
If he had done anything illegal would he blog about it ?Jeez.
Sir Jimmy did, not in a blog but in his bloody autobiography!
Savile himself wrote – astonishingly – in his 1974 autobiography about an incident in which, at the request of the authorities, he located an “attractive girl” who had run away from a remand home, and slept with her as his “reward” before returning her to “the lady of the law” who “was dissuaded from bringing charges against me by her colleagues, for it was well known that were I to go I would probably take half the station with me”. What on earth did the latter part mean? I don’t know, but it doesn’t sound good.
I think what concerned me more of this article was that he admits she was drunk, then says once he finds out she is only a school kid, he puts her out on the street at night and drives off, with his lights off and leaves her. I can see why he did this, but I can't help think how much worse this could have turned out - drunk young girl alone
Please read what was written in the Guardian article:
"*******When he dropped her off****** "I kissed her goodnight and it got a bit more passionate. Thank God it didn't get TOO passionate because something she said sent a shiver down my spine..... Another question and she said she was still at school. I had her out of the car as fast as I could and I drove off with the lights off so she couldn't see my number plate!""
He had got to tyhe place where she wanted to get dropped off...he gave her a goodnight kiss.
He DID NOT just randomly drop her off.
And people wonder why false allegations are made on hearsay towards people when people can't even read an article properly.
Comments
Affordable foreign travel, greater access to higher education (generally involving leaving home), equal opportunities leading to higher disposable income for women, post-industrialisation also encouraged more mobility and opportunity.
Of course all these things didn't just happen on Jan 1st 1980 but the contrast between life expectations at the end of the '60s and now is quite marked imho.
If he had done anything illegal would he blog about it ?Jeez.
paedophilia isn't hereditary ...whatever other members of his family have done doesn't mean he's guilty of it too
sleeping with WILLING groupies who you understand to be over the age of consent is very different to some of the genuine abuse that's being investigated
^^ This.
Comes with the territory when Paul Daniels is mentioned.
He didn't sleep with her nor did his brother sleep with the girl mentioned in that article. The difference is his brother would have probably raped her even knowing her age. Daniels stopped things going further as soon as he knew her age. Its very telling how mud sticks regarding him being related to a paedo and why he felt the need to make this statement on his blog, it just wreaks of a man that wanted to get his story across before the girl comes forward because of his brother. I doubt she will even come forward so he didn't really need to write it.
oh dear .... how can you possibly know that?
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/154147/.html
his brother's conviction had nothing to do with rape or sleeping with an under aged girl so you should be careful what you're saying/accusing people of
Because it says that the girl escaped, so oh dear that's what I assume. If it was just a kiss and it went no further then there would be no reason to use the word escape
seriously?
escaped doesn't have to be from being raped .... you can escape from being pinned against a door and unwillingly kissed too you know
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/154147/.html#ixzz2G0fKqQl0
That's true but it still sounds pretty bad for the girl involved, maybe he didn't plan to grope or rape her then.
Proof that virtually any celebrity could pull back then, no matter how aesthetically "challenged" they were.
Then again these celebs never actually reveal if the groupies were attractive or not. Maybe they'd be the type of girl you or I would turn down, even without being a celeb.
Then again, why would she agree to do a Wife Swap with him if it were the case.
Sir Jimmy did, not in a blog but in his bloody autobiography!
Savile himself wrote – astonishingly – in his 1974 autobiography about an incident in which, at the request of the authorities, he located an “attractive girl” who had run away from a remand home, and slept with her as his “reward” before returning her to “the lady of the law” who “was dissuaded from bringing charges against me by her colleagues, for it was well known that were I to go I would probably take half the station with me”. What on earth did the latter part mean? I don’t know, but it doesn’t sound good.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/rockandpopmusic/9591157/Jimmy-Savile-hid-in-the-dazzle-of-limelight.html
Then he admitted to doing anyone he could in his caravan on Have I Got News For You.
As Graham Linehan said, he created a smokescreen comprised of the truth.
If you mean Paul daniels I doubt it from the article she wrote, it certainly doesnt sound like him.
http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/351029/Vanessa-Feltz
Hee hee:D
Please read what was written in the Guardian article:
"*******When he dropped her off****** "I kissed her goodnight and it got a bit more passionate. Thank God it didn't get TOO passionate because something she said sent a shiver down my spine..... Another question and she said she was still at school. I had her out of the car as fast as I could and I drove off with the lights off so she couldn't see my number plate!""
He had got to tyhe place where she wanted to get dropped off...he gave her a goodnight kiss.
He DID NOT just randomly drop her off.
And people wonder why false allegations are made on hearsay towards people when people can't even read an article properly.