This takes us down a dodgy road if we start saying that one 13-year-old (such as Mandy Smith) is "asking for it" while another is a victim. The blame lies 100% with the abuser.
That's not really what I am saying though is it. Why were these girls at these parties in the first place. That is where they met the older men, It's not a case of them asking for it we delude ourselves sometimes that young girls are all sweet and innocent. They may not have the emotional maturity at that age to understand but when they want to do something they will not change their minds.
They were not dragged kicking and screaming to aftershow parties (for adults). They went quite willingly on their own. Without even knowing the person who they would meet up with there. So they were not groomed by the guy to go to these places and meet up he happened to be there. How many of them hooked up with roadies and the like you never hear about them.
That's not really what I am saying though is it. Why were these girls at these parties in the first place. That is where they met the older men, It's not a case of them asking for it we delude ourselves sometimes that young girls are all sweet and innocent. They may not have the emotional maturity at that age to understand but when they want to do something they will not change their minds.
They were not dragged kicking and screaming to aftershow parties (for adults). They went quite willingly on their own. Without even knowing the person who they would meet up with there. So they were not groomed by the guy to go to these places and meet up he happened to be there. How many of them hooked up with roadies and the like you never hear about them.
Well, someone who worked casually as a roadie (possibly cash-in-hand) for a rock band three or four decades ago may not be terribly easy to track down. Jimmy Page and Bill Wyman are still well-known and therefore incredibly easy for the authorities to find.
Well, someone who worked casually as a roadie (possibly cash-in-hand) for a rock band three or four decades ago may not be terribly easy to track down. Jimmy Page and Bill Wyman are still well-known and therefore incredibly easy for the authorities to find.
"Denim jacket. Couldn't count to three". Yeah, that's really not much to go on as regards identification, is it?
The victim has herself stated publicly she was in a sexual relationship with Wyman at 14. Does she need to come forward to get an investigation started? Surely the police should go to her for a formal statement?
Same reason that a multitude of celeb's can claim to have done drugs (or whatever) and not get prosecuted.
You can pretty-much say what you like about yourself in public but if, in an official police interview, you deny it then there's nothing for the police to go on.
It's well-known that he courted Mandy Smith when he was 48 and she was 14. They were pictured together "dating" at the time and Mandy has stated publicly that he did indeed sleep with her while she was underage.
Seriously, even if Mandy Smith hasn't given a formal statement to the police, there must be more than enough evidence to get Wyman arrested and questioned about the relationship? Why the f*** has this guy got away with it? I remember they were pictured together on an awful lot of "holidays", so did the abuse take place in countries with a lower age of consent?
Unless you have a shitload of money - i would desist from making potentially libelous remarks . ..It may be true but it just isnt wise .:)
That's not really what I am saying though is it. Why were these girls at these parties in the first place. That is where they met the older men, It's not a case of them asking for it we delude ourselves sometimes that young girls are all sweet and innocent. They may not have the emotional maturity at that age to understand but when they want to do something they will not change their minds.
They were not dragged kicking and screaming to aftershow parties (for adults). They went quite willingly on their own. Without even knowing the person who they would meet up with there. So they were not groomed by the guy to go to these places and meet up he happened to be there. How many of them hooked up with roadies and the like you never hear about them.
When I used to go to nightclubs in the early 80s is was often said jokingly that the reason why many nightclubs introduced "Over 21" nights was to try to increase the average age of the females in the clubs to over 18.....
Unless you have a shitload of money - i would desist from making potentially libelous remarks . ..It may be true but it just isnt wise .:)
Explaining this logic to the OP/or any Daily Fail reader, is akin to trying to teach a house brick the alphabet backwards in Swahilli, and once done, expecting it to swim the Atlantic in a gale.
Not going to happen.
These kind of folk are hell-bent on being 'told by the media' what is supposedly what, and then reacting from that, because they truely lack the intellectual capacity to stop, think and determine for themselves.
Kind of sad, but a real tapestry of so many in society who find independent and analytical thought too difficult a prospect, and so rely on the trampoline 'high' of the media to find their moral compass.
If Mandy Smith can get an accusation printed in the Daily Mail, I very much doubt this thread will be at the top of the list for legal action.
Probably not - but Bill is alive and well and can afford the very best lawyers .The Daily Mail has paid out plenty in and out of court for printing stuff wealthy celebs have taking objection to.Just saying
Explaining this logic to the OP/or any Daily Fail reader, is akin to trying to teach a house brick the alphabet backwards in Swahilli, and once done, expecting it to swim the Atlantic in a gale.
Not going to happen.
These kind of folk are hell-bent on being 'told by the media' what is supposedly what, and then reacting from that, because they truely lack the intellectual capacity to stop, think and determine for themselves.
Kind of sad, but a real tapestry of so many in society who find independent and analytical thought too difficult a prospect, and so rely on the trampoline 'high' of the media to find their moral compass.
Oh dear. I actually despise the Daily Mail and have been openly critical of its hysterical scaremongering on many occasions. I started this thread because Bill Wyman's relationship with Mandy Smith was public knowledge at the time, although they stopped short of making a "sex tape" which would have been smoking gun evidence. We're not talking about gossip and rumours, but rather a middle-aged guy flagrantly in a relationship with a 13/14-year-old.
Years later, Smith confirmed that a sexual relationship did indeed take place while she was just 14. The sightings of Wyman and Smith "dating" were very well-recorded. He was shameless about having an underage girlfriend. There would be numerous witnesses who could be approached to verify their arrangements at the time.
Cases have been brought to court on much less evidence. Just look at the William Roache accuser who couldn't remember which year her allegations related to and had a recollection of a warning from Johnny Briggs which somehow became a warning from Peter Adamson when it was explained to her that Briggs didn't join Coronation Street until several years afterwards.
The argument is that she cannot consent as she is underage. However for me there is a world of difference in young girls underage actively going to nightclubs as Mandy and the girl in the Jimmy Page story. With the young girls groomed online by sexual predators in their own rooms.
The underage girls in nightclubs are looking to find sex and party with rock stars and lets not kid ourselves that it does not happen today it does. The online predators are a much more dangerous situation and there should be more effort put into this rather than trying to find if some old Rock star had sex with a girl who was under 16 at a party that she shouldnt have been at.
I remember the days of underage Mandy Smith, Emma Ridley, Amanda de Cadenet and their cohort almost being celebrated by the News of The World as they were paraded, half-dressed across the front pages on a weekly basis as they trouped in and out of Stringfellows and similar venues. I think it was late 1980s/early 1990s tabloid fodder. There was something very icky and nasty about it. I know we have Miley Cyrus and so on shoving their crotches into every media outlet now but at least, for the most part, they are above the age of consent. I agree that what might be happening online, now, is more sinister but it was still rotten back then and, as I said, almost 'celebrated'/ 'licensed' ephebophilia. These girls were openly being courted by older rich and famous men and there was almost a climate of it being 'acceptable' because the girls were seen to be actively seeking out their attention. I wonder how their parents felt about letting their daughters loose within this environment, without apparent boundaries or guidelines. They were 14/15 years old (some as young as 13 IIRC) and they were frequently splashed across the Sunday tabloids, so it's hardly the case that they were sneaking out and doing it covertly. Why were they even being given access to these venues when their ages were widely reported?
I remember the days of underage Mandy Smith, Emma Ridley, Amanda de Cadenet and their cohort almost being celebrated by the News of The World as they were paraded, half-dressed across the front pages on a weekly basis as they trouped in and out of Stringfellows and similar venues. I think it was late 1980s/early 1990s tabloid fodder. There was something very icky and nasty about it. I know we have Miley Cyrus and so on shoving their crotches into every media outlet now but at least, for the most part, they are above the age of consent. I agree that what might be happening online, now, is more sinister but it was still rotten back then and, as I said, almost 'celebrated'/ 'licensed' ephebophilia.
Indeed. Do you remember the countdowns the tabloids used to print until a model could legally go topless at the age of 16? Most famously 15-year-old Samantha Fox and the Sun's creepy countdown to her next birthday.
Indeed. Do you remember the countdowns the tabloids used to print until a model could legally go topless at the age of 16? Most famously 15-year-old Samantha Fox and the Sun's creepy countdown to her next birthday.
I'm no cheerleader for the Sun, but I'm not sure they did that - iirc the Star or Sport might have.
Oh dear. I actually despise the Daily Mail and have been openly critical of its hysterical scaremongering on many occasions. I started this thread because Bill Wyman's relationship with Mandy Smith was public knowledge at the time, although they stopped short of making a "sex tape" which would have been smoking gun evidence. We're not talking about gossip and rumours, but rather a middle-aged guy flagrantly in a relationship with a 13/14-year-old.
Years later, Smith confirmed that a sexual relationship did indeed take place while she was just 14. The sightings of Wyman and Smith "dating" were very well-recorded. He was shameless about having an underage girlfriend. There would be numerous witnesses who could be approached to verify their arrangements at the time.
Cases have been brought to court on much less evidence.Just look at the William Roache accuser who couldn't remember which year her allegations related to and had a recollection of a warning from Johnny Briggs which somehow became a warning from Peter Adamson when it was explained to her that Briggs didn't join Coronation Street until several years afterwards.
Do you ever stop and read the words you leave behind online..?
Re. BiB..There was an accuser - someone who had actually made a complaint.
As for 'cases have been brought to court on much less evidence'..?
errrr no they really have not. The CPS judges the merits of EVERY case before deciding to prosecute..? Why ? Because failed prosecutions cost a lot, and the CPS/police/stats etc look bad when things go south.
Thus far there is **NO** case. How hard is it for you to comprehend this basic reality of how the criminal justice system works. As another poster advised you, you presently may think yourself 'above/beyond' reproach for highly contentious assertions and demands (ie..Why hasn't he been arrested..?), but get a grip. This is a major UK platform, and attention is drawn more frequently than you might think to contentious/potentially libellous threads or statements.
What if the shoe were on the other foot ? What if the media was buzzing with rumours and stories regarding you..? Might be no smoke without fire, might be completely off base. Either way, if you had a way to disprove it, and to do so you had to sue someone to clear your name..methinx you would. I know I would.
You shoot from the hip, and think with your foot - namely putting your Size Whatever straight in the shit without an ounce of credibility or actual fact to back you up.
Not a Fail reader..?
So why is it you replicate perfectly the mindset of such brainwashed and malleable cretins so perfectly with all the uncorroborated BS, innuendo and half-witted assumptions pertaining to something you/I/no one else can know the actual validity to - unless in the room/location - or captured on film and released to the media.
THINK for crying out loud. It's one of the few remaining freedoms we enjoy - before you encapsulate the situation and expect agreement from others better placed and more mature in terms of the 'leap without looking' mindset., to gormlessly agree with you.
A polite way of saying "Grow up. Quickly...Lest you trap yourself in a mire"
You recount stories again as 'proof'...Are they true ? No proof either way
Does that matter to you..? Seemingly not
Do you know what you are talking about..? LOLOL
Do I know what I'm talking about regarding this legal quagmire you are stumbling about in..??
From Wikipedia.. On 2 June 1989, aged 52, Wyman married 18-year-old Mandy Smith whom he had been dating since she was 13 and he was 47 years old. According to Smith, their relationship was sexually consummated when she was 14 years old.
Definitely the illegal activities of a pedophile in plain sight of everyone.
But not in public interest to prosecute so best to forget about this one.
That's quite incredible.
Is he the only person in the UK which the law doesn't apply to?
And what is it with this 'it's not in the public interest' you hear from time to time? What does that mean?
That if the public aren't interested then no law has been broken?
You said the average Joe would be taken in for questioning, and it is double standards. How?
There is no complaint, and nothing for the Police to get involved in. Plenty of under age people have sex, and where do we draw the line?
However distasteful this relationship was, it was an ongoing one that led to marriage.
There is no evidence to investigate, there is no public interest angle, and there are more than enough victims of ongoing, far worse crimes for the Police to be dealing with.
There is a world of difference between an 8 year old cambodian child and Mandy Smith at 13/14.
Don't you remember she was supposed to be a wild child, going out to parties, clubs, drinking, obviously having sex with men etc.
I'm genuinely shocked at the posts I'm reading about! The posters who claim this is abuse, and he's a paeodophile!
Ok, for a middle aged man to go with someone so young, doesn't look great, but you can't put him in the same league as an actual paedophile!
Someone said she was emotionally incapable....I severely doubt that.
I imagine she went with Bill Wyman as it would have been the most shocking, rebellious thing for her to do at the time, as far the media were concerned.....
That's quite incredible.
Is he the only person in the UK which the law doesn't apply to?
And what is it with this 'it's not in the public interest' you hear from time to time? What does that mean?
That if the public aren't interested then no law has been broken?
"In the public interest" doesn't mean "the public are interested in it".
There is a world of difference between an 8 year old cambodian child and Mandy Smith at 13/14.
Don't you remember she was supposed to be a wild child, going out to parties, clubs, drinking, obviously having sex with men etc.
I'm genuinely shocked at the posts I'm reading about! The posters who claim this is abuse, and he's a paeodophile!
Ok, for a middle aged man to go with someone so young, doesn't look great, but you can't put him in the same league as an actual paedophile!
Someone said she was emotionally incapable....I severely doubt that.
I imagine she went with Bill Wyman as it would have been the most shocking, rebellious thing for her to do at the time, as far the media were concerned.....
At last the voice of reason.
There is a world of difference between an 8-year-old being sexually abused and a little scrubber throwing herself at a rockstar. I'm not just talking about Mandy Smith, I was a teenage girl in the 60's and saw so many groupies at gigs, most of whom were below the age of consent but dressed and made up to look much older. Some of the girls I went to school with at the age of 12 and 13 had "boyfriends" of 19 or 20 - did those men know how old they were? I bet they didn't. And what man, rockstar or otherwise, is going to ask to see the birth certificate of a girl who is offering herself on a plate?
Didn't he actually hand himself in at one point and was told they weren't that bothered? Think I read that on here somewhere. Which obviously doesn't make it true...
I bet Paul Gadd is kicking himself that he didn't do that! The police are only interested in the chase.
There is a world of difference between an 8-year-old being sexually abused and a little scrubber throwing herself at a rockstar. I'm not just talking about Mandy Smith, I was a teenage girl in the 60's and saw so many groupies at gigs, most of whom were below the age of consent but dressed and made up to look much older. Some of the girls I went to school with at the age of 12 and 13 had "boyfriends" of 19 or 20 - did those men know how old they were? I bet they didn't. And what man, rockstar or otherwise, is going to ask to see the birth certificate of a girl who is offering herself on a plate?
In the case of Mandy Smith, however, she had a long-term relationship with a much older man with the full knowledge and approval of her mother. She wasn't sneaking around or rebelling.
From Wikipedia.. On 2 June 1989, aged 52, Wyman married 18-year-old Mandy Smith whom he had been dating since she was 13 and he was 47 years old. According to Smith, their relationship was sexually consummated when she was 14 years old.
Definitely the illegal activities of a pedophile in plain sight of everyone.
But not in public interest to prosecute so best to forget about this one.
did you also know that mandy mother in her forties married Wymans son.. what did that make them to each other.. Im confused.
Comments
I'm sure you don't
That's not really what I am saying though is it. Why were these girls at these parties in the first place. That is where they met the older men, It's not a case of them asking for it we delude ourselves sometimes that young girls are all sweet and innocent. They may not have the emotional maturity at that age to understand but when they want to do something they will not change their minds.
They were not dragged kicking and screaming to aftershow parties (for adults). They went quite willingly on their own. Without even knowing the person who they would meet up with there. So they were not groomed by the guy to go to these places and meet up he happened to be there. How many of them hooked up with roadies and the like you never hear about them.
"Denim jacket. Couldn't count to three". Yeah, that's really not much to go on as regards identification, is it?
Same reason that a multitude of celeb's can claim to have done drugs (or whatever) and not get prosecuted.
You can pretty-much say what you like about yourself in public but if, in an official police interview, you deny it then there's nothing for the police to go on.
I clearly scared the OP by talking about the real world.
Stick your noodle back into the pages of The Fail and trust in their reporting standards.
Unless you have a shitload of money - i would desist from making potentially libelous remarks . ..It may be true but it just isnt wise .:)
When I used to go to nightclubs in the early 80s is was often said jokingly that the reason why many nightclubs introduced "Over 21" nights was to try to increase the average age of the females in the clubs to over 18.....
Explaining this logic to the OP/or any Daily Fail reader, is akin to trying to teach a house brick the alphabet backwards in Swahilli, and once done, expecting it to swim the Atlantic in a gale.
Not going to happen.
These kind of folk are hell-bent on being 'told by the media' what is supposedly what, and then reacting from that, because they truely lack the intellectual capacity to stop, think and determine for themselves.
Kind of sad, but a real tapestry of so many in society who find independent and analytical thought too difficult a prospect, and so rely on the trampoline 'high' of the media to find their moral compass.
Logic be damned.
Probably not - but Bill is alive and well and can afford the very best lawyers .The Daily Mail has paid out plenty in and out of court for printing stuff wealthy celebs have taking objection to.Just saying
Years later, Smith confirmed that a sexual relationship did indeed take place while she was just 14. The sightings of Wyman and Smith "dating" were very well-recorded. He was shameless about having an underage girlfriend. There would be numerous witnesses who could be approached to verify their arrangements at the time.
Cases have been brought to court on much less evidence. Just look at the William Roache accuser who couldn't remember which year her allegations related to and had a recollection of a warning from Johnny Briggs which somehow became a warning from Peter Adamson when it was explained to her that Briggs didn't join Coronation Street until several years afterwards.
I remember the days of underage Mandy Smith, Emma Ridley, Amanda de Cadenet and their cohort almost being celebrated by the News of The World as they were paraded, half-dressed across the front pages on a weekly basis as they trouped in and out of Stringfellows and similar venues. I think it was late 1980s/early 1990s tabloid fodder. There was something very icky and nasty about it. I know we have Miley Cyrus and so on shoving their crotches into every media outlet now but at least, for the most part, they are above the age of consent. I agree that what might be happening online, now, is more sinister but it was still rotten back then and, as I said, almost 'celebrated'/ 'licensed' ephebophilia. These girls were openly being courted by older rich and famous men and there was almost a climate of it being 'acceptable' because the girls were seen to be actively seeking out their attention. I wonder how their parents felt about letting their daughters loose within this environment, without apparent boundaries or guidelines. They were 14/15 years old (some as young as 13 IIRC) and they were frequently splashed across the Sunday tabloids, so it's hardly the case that they were sneaking out and doing it covertly. Why were they even being given access to these venues when their ages were widely reported?
I'm no cheerleader for the Sun, but I'm not sure they did that - iirc the Star or Sport might have.
Do you ever stop and read the words you leave behind online..?
Re. BiB..There was an accuser - someone who had actually made a complaint.
As for 'cases have been brought to court on much less evidence'..?
errrr no they really have not. The CPS judges the merits of EVERY case before deciding to prosecute..? Why ? Because failed prosecutions cost a lot, and the CPS/police/stats etc look bad when things go south.
Thus far there is **NO** case. How hard is it for you to comprehend this basic reality of how the criminal justice system works. As another poster advised you, you presently may think yourself 'above/beyond' reproach for highly contentious assertions and demands (ie..Why hasn't he been arrested..?), but get a grip. This is a major UK platform, and attention is drawn more frequently than you might think to contentious/potentially libellous threads or statements.
What if the shoe were on the other foot ? What if the media was buzzing with rumours and stories regarding you..? Might be no smoke without fire, might be completely off base. Either way, if you had a way to disprove it, and to do so you had to sue someone to clear your name..methinx you would. I know I would.
You shoot from the hip, and think with your foot - namely putting your Size Whatever straight in the shit without an ounce of credibility or actual fact to back you up.
Not a Fail reader..?
So why is it you replicate perfectly the mindset of such brainwashed and malleable cretins so perfectly with all the uncorroborated BS, innuendo and half-witted assumptions pertaining to something you/I/no one else can know the actual validity to - unless in the room/location - or captured on film and released to the media.
THINK for crying out loud. It's one of the few remaining freedoms we enjoy - before you encapsulate the situation and expect agreement from others better placed and more mature in terms of the 'leap without looking' mindset., to gormlessly agree with you.
A polite way of saying "Grow up. Quickly...Lest you trap yourself in a mire"
You recount stories again as 'proof'...Are they true ? No proof either way
Does that matter to you..? Seemingly not
Do you know what you are talking about..? LOLOL
Do I know what I'm talking about regarding this legal quagmire you are stumbling about in..??
Hell no. Just a few random guesses is all ;-)
That's quite incredible.
Is he the only person in the UK which the law doesn't apply to?
And what is it with this 'it's not in the public interest' you hear from time to time? What does that mean?
That if the public aren't interested then no law has been broken?
You said the average Joe would be taken in for questioning, and it is double standards. How?
There is no complaint, and nothing for the Police to get involved in. Plenty of under age people have sex, and where do we draw the line?
However distasteful this relationship was, it was an ongoing one that led to marriage.
There is no evidence to investigate, there is no public interest angle, and there are more than enough victims of ongoing, far worse crimes for the Police to be dealing with.
Or Wyman groomed her, which is more likely.
"In the public interest" doesn't mean "the public are interested in it".
LOL careful, on here you'll have heads imploding with that one
In fact hear them now....pop pop pop pop
At last the voice of reason.
There is a world of difference between an 8-year-old being sexually abused and a little scrubber throwing herself at a rockstar. I'm not just talking about Mandy Smith, I was a teenage girl in the 60's and saw so many groupies at gigs, most of whom were below the age of consent but dressed and made up to look much older. Some of the girls I went to school with at the age of 12 and 13 had "boyfriends" of 19 or 20 - did those men know how old they were? I bet they didn't. And what man, rockstar or otherwise, is going to ask to see the birth certificate of a girl who is offering herself on a plate?
I bet Paul Gadd is kicking himself that he didn't do that! The police are only interested in the chase.