Stuart Hall admits 14 sexual assaults...

18911131418

Comments

  • bbnutnutbbnutnut Posts: 1,582
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    benjamini wrote: »
    Not sure what purpose a custodial sentence would serve. He is clearly not a threat. And the utter loss of his reputation is it seems to me punishment enough. I hasten to add I think he deserves all he gets. I would prefer that he was put on the sex offenders list and community service .

    Why do you consider him 'not a threat'? Because he's old? He was well able to give his pompous interview denying the allegations which we now know was a pack of lies.

    He was strong enough to spew forth his bile on the victims of his abuse. Then he suddenly developed a heart problem because of all this, I don't believe for one minute he has a serious heart problem. People don't change just because they are old.

    I don't think he should be free to abuse others. He should be locked up to serve a punishment and also as a deterrent to others who think they can play the 'oh, but I'm feeble now' card. One sexual abuser I knew of growing up was well into his seventies and still abusing kids.

    On top of everything else, he's an extremely selfish man. Going on about how he thought of suicide because of the stress. I would say the only reason he thought of suicide was to avoid facing the truth, without a thought for what he'd leave his family to deal with. That's if he ever thought of suicide at all, probably just a blackmail type of threat - 'if you publish stuff on me, you'll be responsible for my death' type of thing. No, Hall, you alone are responsible for your actions. past and present.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,177
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Another one with a title, an OBE.
  • stargazer61stargazer61 Posts: 70,937
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Fizgig wrote: »
    Another one with a title, an OBE.

    An OBE is not a title , and hundreds of thousands of people have been awarded the OBE
  • benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bbnutnut wrote: »
    Why do you consider him 'not a threat'? Because he's old? He was well able to give his pompous interview denying the allegations which we now know was a pack of lies.

    He was strong enough to spew forth his bile on the victims of his abuse. Then he suddenly developed a heart problem because of all this, I don't believe for one minute he has a serious heart problem. People don't change just because they are old.

    I don't think he should be free to abuse others. He should be locked up to serve a punishment and also as a deterrent to others who think they can play the 'oh, but I'm feeble now' card. One sexual abuser I knew of growing up was well into his seventies and still abusing kids.

    On top of everything else, he's an extremely selfish man. Going on about how he thought of suicide because of the stress. I would say the only reason he thought of suicide was to avoid facing the truth, without a thought for what he'd leave his family to deal with. That's if he ever thought of suicide at all, probably just a blackmail type of threat - 'if you publish stuff on me, you'll be responsible for my death' type of thing. No, Hall, you alone are responsible for your actions. past and present.

    I dont disagree with you, and I would not in any way make excuses for him nor his actions.
    I doubt tho that he poses any threat to the public, his last offence was in the 80s. He is a very old man now.
    Also I doubt prison will be much more of a punishment than his already monumental public disgrace.
    If it were not for the fact that a 9 year old was involved I probably would have said a suspended sentence, fine and sex offenders register were sufficient.
  • kimindexkimindex Posts: 68,250
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I doubt he'd be able to any work part of a community service, like road sweeping or graffiti removal, and, anything he could do, like teaching broadcasting or hospital radio, wouldn't be wanted.

    Perhaps some sort of curfew, amounting to house arrest, but I don't think that would be seen as enough of a punishment.
  • nathanbrazilnathanbrazil Posts: 8,863
    Forum Member
    He will be put on the sex offenders register

    Yes, no more 'up and under' for him. Oh no, wait a minute, that was Eddie Wearing. :)

    But seriously, like the case of Jimmy Saville, it beggars belief that no one at the BBC knew anything about this perv's disgusting activities. Someone must've known something, and kept quiet.
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,948
    Forum Member
    But seriously, like the case of Jimmy Saville, it beggars belief that no one at the BBC knew anything about this perv's disgusting activities. Someone must've known something, and kept quiet.

    Stuart Hall?
  • IvanIVIvanIV Posts: 30,310
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yes, no more 'up and under' for him. Oh no, wait a minute, that was Eddie Wearing. :)

    But seriously, like the case of Jimmy Saville, it beggars belief that no one at the BBC knew anything about this perv's disgusting activities. Someone must've known something, and kept quiet.

    Probably one big paedo ring, all keeping stumm and having fun molesting children.
  • Mark CMark C Posts: 20,894
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bryemycaz wrote: »
    Oh I thought Eddie Wearing presented it and Hall did the commentary.

    There were three situations:-

    The UK heat editions. Hall and Waring were the invision on screen presenters.

    The international editions (excluding the UK one)

    The foreign host broadcaster presenters were on screen (talking in their local language) Hall and Waring were audio only (usually in telephone quality) providing English commentary

    The International UK edition

    Hall and Waring were the invision on screen presenters.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 17,021
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    IvanIV wrote: »
    Probably one big paedo ring, all keeping stumm and having fun molesting children.

    I suspect that there's a 'code' of sorts among people like that - If you get caught you're on your own and don't grass on others, in return they won't grass on you. Hence so many 'loner' paedos in the news.
  • Phoenix LazarusPhoenix Lazarus Posts: 17,306
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    bbnutnut wrote: »
    he suddenly developed a heart problem because of all this, I don't believe for one minute he has a serious heart problem. People don't change just because they are old.

    Well they do physically!
  • violetcrawleyvioletcrawley Posts: 734
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Gloria Hunniford worked with him in Manchester talking about he was a player but she had no idea.

    Eamon worked with him as well.

    He was outed by a anon letter send to independent who passed on to the police.

    Eamon just said this on this morning.
  • yorkiegalyorkiegal Posts: 18,929
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think there has to be a custodial sentance here. Yes he is elderly but that also means he has benefitted from years of living the good life when he should have been banged up. The fact that he might not survive many years in prison is irrelevant imo. If he'd been caught 20 years ago he could have been properly punished and would have not have carried on earning good money with the BBC afterwards. It should never be too late for someone to pay for their crimes.
  • benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Gloria Hunniford worked with him in Manchester talking about he was a player but she had no idea.

    Eamon worked with him as well.

    He was outed by a anon letter send to independent who passed on to the police.

    Eamon just said this on this morning.

    Post 170 on this thread. Full article from the Independant.
  • dorydaryldorydaryl Posts: 15,927
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    bbnutnut wrote: »
    Why do you consider him 'not a threat'? Because he's old? He was well able to give his pompous interview denying the allegations which we now know was a pack of lies.

    He was strong enough to spew forth his bile on the victims of his abuse. Then he suddenly developed a heart problem because of all this, I don't believe for one minute he has a serious heart problem. People don't change just because they are old.

    I don't think he should be free to abuse others. He should be locked up to serve a punishment and also as a deterrent to others who think they can play the 'oh, but I'm feeble now' card. One sexual abuser I knew of growing up was well into his seventies and still abusing kids.

    On top of everything else, he's an extremely selfish man. Going on about how he thought of suicide because of the stress. I would say the only reason he thought of suicide was to avoid facing the truth, without a thought for what he'd leave his family to deal with. That's if he ever thought of suicide at all, probably just a blackmail type of threat - 'if you publish stuff on me, you'll be responsible for my death' type of thing. No, Hall, you alone are responsible for your actions. past and present.


    Kind of agree with you on much of this. Being in your 80s doesn't wipe away 'past sins'. He tried to denigrate those he had abused with his earlier denials. You could say he's 'lucky' that he reached such a good age without being rumbled. Shame those he abused might carry the life sentence of what he (now, admittedly) did to them. For some, it might have been like being abused all over again with some of the remarks he made at an earlier point. At least they will now be spared from testifying.

    It (relying on the 'age'/ illness defence) also reminds me of people who hide behind the fact that they are parents and use their children to manipulate sympathy when they have done something terrible.
  • jjnejjne Posts: 6,580
    Forum Member
    But seriously, like the case of Jimmy Saville, it beggars belief that no one at the BBC knew anything about this perv's disgusting activities. Someone must've known something, and kept quiet.

    Maybe they did know, and that's why Hall moved to that other haven for perverts and molesters, Granada Television.

    Seriously, I cannot comprehend why no-one is focussing on that company, when it is becoming increasingly obvious that they had a problem with this stuff as serious as the BBC.
  • The PrumeisterThe Prumeister Posts: 22,398
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    benjamini wrote: »
    I dont disagree with you, and I would not in any way make excuses for him nor his actions.
    I doubt tho that he poses any threat to the public, his last offence was in the 80s. He is a very old man now.
    Also I doubt prison will be much more of a punishment than his already monumental public disgrace.
    If it were not for the fact that a 9 year old was involved I probably would have said a suspended sentence, fine and sex offenders register were sufficient.




    I hope he dies in prison. A repulsive, predatory 'man' who thought he was above the law. He needs to atone for his sins and spending the rest of his days behind bars will be sufficient IMHO.
  • kimindexkimindex Posts: 68,250
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    dorydaryl wrote: »
    Kind of agree with you on much of this. Being in your 80s doesn't wipe away 'past sins'. He tried to denigrate those he had abused with his earlier denials. You could say he's 'lucky' that he reached such a good age without being rumbled. Shame those he abused might carry the life sentence of what he (now, admittedly) did to them. For some, it might have been like being abused all over again with some of the remarks he made at an earlier point. At least they will now be spared from testifying.

    It (relying on the 'age'/ illness defence) also reminds me of people who hide behind the fact that they are parents and use their children to manipulate sympathy when they have done something terrible.
    Or think saying that they've become religious will advantage them.
  • Jo MarchJo March Posts: 9,256
    Forum Member
    benjamini wrote: »
    I dont disagree with you, and I would not in any way make excuses for him nor his actions.
    I doubt tho that he poses any threat to the public, his last offence was in the 80s. He is a very old man now.
    Also I doubt prison will be much more of a punishment than his already monumental public disgrace.
    If it were not for the fact that a 9 year old was involved I probably would have said a suspended sentence, fine and sex offenders register were sufficient.
    That we know of ..perhaps there are people out there who have not ,for whatever reasons, come forward.
  • Kiko H FanKiko H Fan Posts: 6,546
    Forum Member
    Dirty sod. Let's hang him.
  • IvanIVIvanIV Posts: 30,310
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    There's a statute of limitations and if the crime is still punishable then it should be. That's the whole point, it's not based on the age of the "perp", it's based on time passed since. So whether he's 80 or 100 it does not matter. age did not turn him into a nice grandad with all sins washed away, he's 80 years old paedo.
  • Vodka_DrinkaVodka_Drinka Posts: 28,753
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jjne wrote: »
    Maybe they did know, and that's why Hall moved to that other haven for perverts and molesters, Granada Television.

    Seriously, I cannot comprehend why no-one is focussing on that company, when it is becoming increasingly obvious that they had a problem with this stuff as serious as the BBC.

    I must admit I wondered why the guns haven't come out for Granada/ITV as well. The Daily Mail has yet another BBC bashing article today, but then again they don't need an excuse to attack the Beeb.
  • EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    IvanIV wrote: »
    There's a statute of limitations and if the crime is still punishable then it should be. That's the whole point, it's not based on the age of the "perp", it's based on time passed since. So whether he's 80 or 100 it does not matter. age did not turn him into a nice grandad with all sins washed away, he's 80 years old paedo.

    Yes, age is no reason not to send him to prison especially as he seems to be in reasonable health.
  • i4ui4u Posts: 54,948
    Forum Member
    benjamini wrote: »
    Post 170 on this thread. Full article from the Independant.

    The article has been err...'edited' since yesterday.


    The letter says they first met at a school prize giving similar to Susan Harrison's account., but Susan's was an one off incident.

    If the journalist recieved the letter in May last year and took it to police, they were able without publicity investigate and decide they had reason to arrest him last December on suspicion of rape and indecent assault.
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    bbnutnut wrote: »
    Why do you consider him 'not a threat'? Because he's old? He was well able to give his pompous interview denying the allegations which we now know was a pack of lies.

    He was strong enough to spew forth his bile on the victims of his abuse. Then he suddenly developed a heart problem because of all this, I don't believe for one minute he has a serious heart problem. People don't change just because they are old.

    I don't think he should be free to abuse others. He should be locked up to serve a punishment and also as a deterrent to others who think they can play the 'oh, but I'm feeble now' card. One sexual abuser I knew of growing up was well into his seventies and still abusing kids.

    On top of everything else, he's an extremely selfish man. Going on about how he thought of suicide because of the stress. I would say the only reason he thought of suicide was to avoid facing the truth, without a thought for what he'd leave his family to deal with. That's if he ever thought of suicide at all, probably just a blackmail type of threat - 'if you publish stuff on me, you'll be responsible for my death' type of thing. No, Hall, you alone are responsible for your actions. past and present.

    Totally agree, and I made the same points earlier in this thread. That statement was his biggest mistake as it showed him up for the arrogant, devious manipulator he is. It's that as much as anything else that warrants a jail sentence because it showed a disgusting and callous disregard for his victims.
Sign In or Register to comment.