Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Jimmy Saville to be revealed as a paedophile? (Part 7)


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-05-2013, 17:38
loonattic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 479
good to see that bill roach denies the ridiculous claims and will fight them.i can see this being thrown out of court as there is no actuall evidence of anything happening.how could there be after nearly half a centuary? just the words of someone out to cause trouble and they have succeeded in that.i would think that very few people belive this story.it makes you wonder why they bothered to come out with something that cant be proved.it just shows further that the woman saying it could have problems.
loonattic is offline  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 02-05-2013, 17:46
*Clem*
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: England
Posts: 2,958
good to see that bill roach denies the ridiculous claims and will fight them.i can see this being thrown out of court as there is no actuall evidence of anything happening.how could there be after nearly half a centuary? just the words of someone out to cause trouble and they have succeeded in that.i would think that very few people belive this story.it makes you wonder why they bothered to come out with something that cant be proved.it just shows further that the woman saying it could have problems.
Did you not notice that Stuart Hall's crimes date back to the 60s too?

And how on earth do you know there's no evidence?

Personally I think they have evidence against Bill Roache to charge him so quickly. Maybe the girl told other people about the rapes at the time and they kept quiet. Who knows.
*Clem* is online now  
Old 02-05-2013, 17:51
Keyser Soze
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,110
good to see that bill roach denies the ridiculous claims and will fight them.i can see this being thrown out of court as there is no actuall evidence of anything happening.how could there be after nearly half a centuary? just the words of someone out to cause trouble and they have succeeded in that.i would think that very few people belive this story.it makes you wonder why they bothered to come out with something that cant be proved.it just shows further that the woman saying it could have problems.
Maybe he confessed? Maybe there is actual evidence? Who knows. All that we know for sure is that the CPS have stated that they felt there was enough to the case for him to be charged and for the case to go to court. They don't do these things lightly.

Let's wait until the court case to see what's what. For the time being he is, of course, innocent until proven guilty.
Keyser Soze is offline  
Old 02-05-2013, 17:55
Cryolemon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Newark, Notts, UK
Posts: 6,131
Did you not notice that Stuart Hall's crimes date back to the 60s too?

And how on earth do you know there's no evidence?

Personally I think they have evidence against Bill Roache to charge him so quickly. Maybe the girl told other people about the rapes at the time and they kept quiet. Who knows.
The thing with the Roache case is that there's only one alleged victim, which might make it somewhat harder to prove. Clearly the CPS must be fairly confident, else they wouldn't have charged him though.
Cryolemon is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 02-05-2013, 18:01
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 42,380
good to see that bill roach denies the ridiculous claims and will fight them.i can see this being thrown out of court as there is no actuall evidence of anything happening.how could there be after nearly half a centuary? just the words of someone out to cause trouble and they have succeeded in that.i would think that very few people belive this story.it makes you wonder why they bothered to come out with something that cant be proved.it just shows further that the woman saying it could have problems.
We simply don't know what this woman's relationship with him was....perhaps she was the family babysitter or something? I wouldn't be so sure that this will be thrown of court btw. She could be a very compelling and convincing witness for all we know, let's wait and see.

Sworn testimony is often accepted as hard and strong evidence in a court of law....it's something of a myth that you need forensic evidence or other witnesses to back up your testimony and in order to convince a jury.
Eurostar is online now  
Old 02-05-2013, 18:25
Early Bird
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,845
The thing with the Roache case is that there's only one alleged victim, which might make it somewhat harder to prove. Clearly the CPS must be fairly confident, else they wouldn't have charged him though.
Maybe she did a Monica Lewinsky?
Early Bird is offline  
Old 02-05-2013, 18:54
Keyser Soze
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,110
I just posted this in the Stuart Hall thread, but it is just as relevant here:

Fascinating insight into how the Stuart Hall case came about from the Independent.
Keyser Soze is offline  
Old 02-05-2013, 19:14
dsnik
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wessex
Posts: 4,861
Did you not notice that Stuart Hall's crimes date back to the 60s too?
loonattic is well aware of the Stuart Hall case, he/she has been trolling over in the SH thread too. Best to ignore.
dsnik is offline  
Old 02-05-2013, 19:16
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 34,855
The thing with the Roache case is that there's only one alleged victim, which might make it somewhat harder to prove. Clearly the CPS must be fairly confident, else they wouldn't have charged him though.
Not necessarily, I am as I have said often,. of the opinion that in this climate and with so many accusations of cover ups that the CPS will go ahead with prosecutions and let a jury decide based upon the evidence , that way they cannot be accsued of coverups or protection . As we saw with another actor the Chief Prosecutor for the CPS in that area dropped the case but another CPS advisor for the DPP months later told the police after review they should charge the man, so obviously of different opinions or one decided "let a jury decide and the public see we take action"

I think that they are a bit damned if they do damned if they dont really .

On another note I am glad Stuart Hall admitted guilt, sad that it happened in the first case for his victims and al lthose who looked up to and trusted him , but at least they dont get to be grilled in court and put through it again.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 02-05-2013, 19:24
nanscombe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kent, Uk
Posts: 15,858
... Sworn testimony is often accepted as hard and strong evidence in a court of law...
Personally, I'd probably want a bit more than a single sworn testimony to convict someone. I'd want some type of corroboration to offset "reasonable doubt".

One possible danger is people's judgement could be swayed by personal opinions as in "I always thought XXX was a bit sleazy" where their opinion actually proves nothing.
nanscombe is online now  
Old 02-05-2013, 20:09
Jo March
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,796
We simply don't know what this woman's relationship with him was....perhaps she was the family babysitter or something? I wouldn't be so sure that this will be thrown of court btw. She could be a very compelling and convincing witness for all we know, let's wait and see.

Sworn testimony is often accepted as hard and strong evidence in a court of law....it's something of a myth that you need forensic evidence or other witnesses to back up your testimony and in order to convince a jury.
A 15 year old I still class as a girl not a woman.
Jo March is offline  
Old 02-05-2013, 22:54
Gripper Stebson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 647
Shocking news today about Hall. When it was first reported he was arrested back in December I thought "What??!! Stuart Hall?! No way would he have done anything like that!". But I was proved wrong with today's news. Disgusting vile man. Kids under 16, with one as young as 9 years old. Absolutely bloody disgusting. He may be he 83 years old, but he should still goto prison for his crimes. This should have happened to Saville years ago when he was still alive.

My memories of enjoying watching Jim'll Fix It when I was a kid to young adult all those years ago were tarnished when the revelations of Jimmy Saville were exposed last October. Now my memories of enjoying watching It's A Knockout are now tarnished too.

Regarding Roache. Was shocked at this news yesterday too. I really HOPE he is genuinelly innocent of this alleged rape back in 1967, and is found innocent and all charges dropped. Though I don't have a good feeling about this to be honest. In one of the articles I read somewhere it said police found "sufficient evidence"at his home yesterday, and were seen bringing paper bags of evidence from his home and into the police car. Evidence from all those years ago?? Won't say no more. But I don't have a good feeling about this. Let's see what happens on May 14th.

Mr Harris. As with the others I thought no way could he have done any of these alleged assaults. Not Rolf surely. But with today's news about him too, it doesn't seem to be looking very good either.

Dave Lee Travis. Was expecting to have heard more news early this week, as the last news report said he was bailed untill April. It's now May, and no news. His alleged crimes seem to be nothing more than one or two cases of quick bum or breast groping of grown women over the age of 18 back in the 70's. Whilst I don't condone that behaviour, and is very unnaceptable in the age we live in now, life was very different back then. He should be found innocent and his name cleared, and be allowed to get on with the rest of his life. Back in 1992 when I was at college a couple of girls groped my bum. Can I now goto the police to report these two girls, have them arrested and brought to court for sentencing? NO, I would be laughed at by police and told to bugger off and stop wasting police time!
Gripper Stebson is offline  
Old 02-05-2013, 23:08
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 34,855
snip>> Whilst I don't condone that behaviour, and is very unnaceptable in the age we live in now, life was very different back then. He should be found innocent and his name cleared, and be allowed to get on with the rest of his life. Back in 1992 when I was at college a couple of girls groped my bum. Can I now goto the police to report these two girls, have them arrested and brought to court for sentencing? NO, I would be laughed at by police and told to bugger off and stop wasting police time!


Yes things were different back then, and before anyone screams "that does not make it right" I know it doesnt, but times were different and if it were a grope over clothing then I would say is it worth taxpayers money. However with Savile and Hall we have seen it was not just a grope it was far far worse , I wish it had as a grope would be easy for a victim to get over , so I can only assume that in the other cases where we have not really been told the facts as investigations continue the allegations are serious ones and not of a quick grope of a bum as someone walked past.

It of course remains to be seen if the allegations are true or not so until such time we sympathise with alleged victims and and treat the alleged assailant as innocent until proven guilty.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 02-05-2013, 23:10
sozzled2day
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,168
I thought it was quite telling that Hall said in his statement something to the effect of: "I now accept what I did was wrong"... now?... so back then he really thought it was acceptable to force himself onto unwilling victims? Maybe if some of the parents had taken it further (and I'm not judging any of them because I imagine they did what they did to protect their kids from unwanted publicity and what not) - but if some had spoken up, perhaps Hall would have been stopped in his tracks and realised it was 'wrong' a long time ago. The fact he wasn't brought to task earlier made it easier for him to think he was invincible.

Makes me wonder how many other celebs were at it, safe in the knowledge that their fame made them untouchable. I don't believe for a second that there aren't many many more that are thanking their lucky stars they haven't been found out yet. And just because someone is old and committed the crimes years ago doesn't mean they should be let off. I think that's ridiculous. Hall was fortunate enough to go undiscovered for decades, but that doesn't make him less guilty - it just makes him lucky to have been able to carry on with his life unpunished for what he'd done.

EDIT: I absolutely do not put DLT in the same category as Hall and Saville. The complaints about him appear to have come from women who were adults at the time (someone correct me if I'm wrong) - and if all women went to the police to complain about being groped/fondled back in the 70s, we'd be sent packing and laughed out of the station.
sozzled2day is offline  
Old 02-05-2013, 23:16
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 34,855
I thought it was quite telling that Hall said in his statement something to the effect of: "I now accept what I did was wrong"... now?... so back then he really thought it was acceptable to force himself onto unwilling victims? Maybe if some of the parents had taken it further (and I'm not judging any of them because I imagine they did what they did to protect their kids from unwanted publicity and what not) - but if some had spoken up, perhaps Hall would have been stopped in his tracks and realised it was 'wrong' a long time ago. The fact he wasn't brought to task earlier made it easier for him to think he was invincible.

Makes me wonder how many other celebs were at it, safe in the knowledge that their fame made them untouchable. I don't believe for a second that there aren't many many more that are thanking their lucky stars they haven't been found out yet. And just because someone is old and committed the crimes years ago doesn't mean they should be let off. I think that's ridiculous. Hall was fortunate enough to go undiscovered for decades, but that doesn't make him less guilty - it just makes him lucky to have been able to carry on with his life unpunished for what he'd done.
In those days some kids will not have been believed and also sexual abuse and rape often was not reported as many people looked at the victim as being just as guilty as the assailant, in communities it brought shame on the household, most abuse is carried out by a person known to the victim so families tended to sweep under the carpet that "Uncle Barney" or "Mr Smith" from next door was a pervert or paedophile and carry on with a nudge and a wink to make sure he wasn't left alone with the kids.

So whilst we may be shocked at a few well known celebs it is not half as shocking as the many ordinary folk who will never be reported as it happened in a time when you just didn't report it especially if it was a friend or family.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 02-05-2013, 23:59
sozzled2day
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,168
Hall was initially arrested in December and made a statement labelling the claims
"pernicious, callous, cruel and above all spurious".
So as recently as just 4 months ago, he was making out his victims were all liars and fantasists. I'm sure Saville would have said a lot worse if he'd ever been exposed while he was alive. He was a bigger star than Hall with access to more high-profile and influential people. His defence would have made mince meat out of the victims. I wonder why Hall caved so fast. Was he presented with evidence he knew he couldn't defend? I don't think he admitted guilt out of remorse for his victims given what he said about their claims, so why admit guilt? I don't understand.
sozzled2day is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 00:30
Black Velvet
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 682
So as recently as just 4 months ago, he was making out his victims were all liars and fantasists. I'm sure Saville would have said a lot worse if he'd ever been exposed while he was alive. He was a bigger star than Hall with access to more high-profile and influential people. His defence would have made mince meat out of the victims. I wonder why Hall caved so fast. Was he presented with evidence he knew he couldn't defend? I don't think he admitted guilt out of remorse for his victims given what he said about their claims, so why admit guilt? I don't understand.
I was really surprised about Hall admitting guilt as well especially after denying it and making out his victims were all liars.
I don't think if Saville had still been alive that he would have caved in so easily. He would have denied all the charges and would have fought to the bitter end.
I'm afraid I can't answer your question because I'm asking the same one myself.
Black Velvet is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 01:13
bbnutnut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 604
So as recently as just 4 months ago, he was making out his victims were all liars and fantasists. I'm sure Saville would have said a lot worse if he'd ever been exposed while he was alive. He was a bigger star than Hall with access to more high-profile and influential people. His defence would have made mince meat out of the victims. I wonder why Hall caved so fast. Was he presented with evidence he knew he couldn't defend? I don't think he admitted guilt out of remorse for his victims given what he said about their claims, so why admit guilt? I don't understand.
I think, as has been pointed to earlier in this thread, that there may have been too many credible witnesses. In the papers it stated that some of the children Hall abused were daughters of friends of his and that the parents were told about it by their children at the time.

I would surmise that Hall did not want to face all these ex-friends in court and try to convince a jury that not only were the children (now adults) lying but the parents were also lying about what the children told them years ago and also lying about why they stopped having any further dealings with him.

There could even be a letter in existence from back then where he apologised and promised never to do anything like that again. All in all, I don't think his conscience had anything to do with him admitting guilt - just the better option of at least avoiding the shame of the actual details of a court case appearing in the papers. My opinion anyway for what it's worth.
bbnutnut is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 06:20
Rowan Hedge
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,672
Yewtree has been quite adapt at cornering the showbiz pervs, how long before current/ex and dead members of the political establishment are investigated over their antics, labour and elm guest house come to mind.
Rowan Hedge is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 06:29
sozzled2day
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,168
All in all, I don't think his conscience had anything to do with him admitting guilt - just the better option of at least avoiding the shame of the actual details of a court case appearing in the papers. My opinion anyway for what it's worth.
I don't think he had a conscience by the sounds of it. These 'stars' seem to live by different rules than the rest of us.

I was really surprised about Hall admitting guilt as well especially after denying it and making out his victims were all liars.
I don't think if Saville had still been alive that he would have caved in so easily. He would have denied all the charges and would have fought to the bitter end.
Yes I think he would have done. The majority of victims he assaulted were vulnerable and he knew they'd have a hard time getting anyone to believe he could be capable of such disgusting and perverted acts. Even the police told some victims not to bother taking it further!

If the BBC and other employers weren't so keen on portraying fake personas for the public and hiding their dark side, maybe we wouldn't be so shocked by all the revelations coming out about people we 'grew up' with.
sozzled2day is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 06:59
Yorkie47
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,425
Shocking news today about Hall. When it was first reported he was arrested back in December I thought "What??!! Stuart Hall?! No way would he have done anything like that!". But I was proved wrong with today's news. Disgusting vile man. Kids under 16, with one as young as 9 years old. Absolutely bloody disgusting. He may be he 83 years old, but he should still goto prison for his crimes. This should have happened to Saville years ago when he was still alive.

My memories of enjoying watching Jim'll Fix It when I was a kid to young adult all those years ago were tarnished when the revelations of Jimmy Saville were exposed last October. Now my memories of enjoying watching It's A Knockout are now tarnished too.

Regarding Roache. Was shocked at this news yesterday too. I really HOPE he is genuinelly innocent of this alleged rape back in 1967, and is found innocent and all charges dropped. Though I don't have a good feeling about this to be honest. In one of the articles I read somewhere it said police found "sufficient evidence"at his home yesterday, and were seen bringing paper bags of evidence from his home and into the police car. Evidence from all those years ago?? Won't say no more. But I don't have a good feeling about this. Let's see what happens on May 14th.

Mr Harris. As with the others I thought no way could he have done any of these alleged assaults. Not Rolf surely. But with today's news about him too, it doesn't seem to be looking very good either.

Dave Lee Travis. Was expecting to have heard more news early this week, as the last news report said he was bailed untill April. It's now May, and no news. His alleged crimes seem to be nothing more than one or two cases of quick bum or breast groping of grown women over the age of 18 back in the 70's. Whilst I don't condone that behaviour, and is very unnaceptable in the age we live in now, life was very different back then. He should be found innocent and his name cleared, and be allowed to get on with the rest of his life. Back in 1992 when I was at college a couple of girls groped my bum. Can I now goto the police to report these two girls, have them arrested and brought to court for sentencing? NO, I would be laughed at by police and told to bugger off and stop wasting police time!
I'm nodding as I'm reading all this, I agree with you.
Yorkie47 is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 07:09
Yorkie47
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,425
Shocking news today about Hall. When it was first reported he was arrested back in December I thought "What??!! Stuart Hall?! No way would he have done anything like that!". But I was proved wrong with today's news. Disgusting vile man. Kids under 16, with one as young as 9 years old. Absolutely bloody disgusting. He may be he 83 years old, but he should still goto prison for his crimes. This should have happened to Saville years ago when he was still alive.

My memories of enjoying watching Jim'll Fix It when I was a kid to young adult all those years ago were tarnished when the revelations of Jimmy Saville were exposed last October. Now my memories of enjoying watching It's A Knockout are now tarnished too.

Regarding Roache. Was shocked at this news yesterday too. I really HOPE he is genuinelly innocent of this alleged rape back in 1967, and is found innocent and all charges dropped. Though I don't have a good feeling about this to be honest. In one of the articles I read somewhere it said police found "sufficient evidence"at his home yesterday, and were seen bringing paper bags of evidence from his home and into the police car. Evidence from all those years ago?? Won't say no more. But I don't have a good feeling about this. Let's see what happens on May 14th.

Mr Harris. As with the others I thought no way could he have done any of these alleged assaults. Not Rolf surely. But with today's news about him too, it doesn't seem to be looking very good either.

Dave Lee Travis. Was expecting to have heard more news early this week, as the last news report said he was bailed untill April. It's now May, and no news. His alleged crimes seem to be nothing more than one or two cases of quick bum or breast groping of grown women over the age of 18 back in the 70's. Whilst I don't condone that behaviour, and is very unnaceptable in the age we live in now, life was very different back then. He should be found innocent and his name cleared, and be allowed to get on with the rest of his life. Back in 1992 when I was at college a couple of girls groped my bum. Can I now goto the police to report these two girls, have them arrested and brought to court for sentencing? NO, I would be laughed at by police and told to bugger off and stop wasting police time!
I'm nodding as I'm reading all this, I agree with you.

I actually DID hear rumours about Stuart Hall back in the 70s but I didn't believe them. Then again, someone told me Rock Hudson was gay way back in the 60s and I didn't believe them either! I think I'm a bit naive!

I want to believe that Rolf Harris and Bill Roache are innocent and I refuse to be judge and jury until proved otherwise (unlike some posters on here).

I do think there's a major difference between "kiddy fiddling" and TV stars taking advantage of precocious under-age girls. Good grief, the prisons are going to be full of old rockers if this carries on!

Also, I don't think there's a woman alive who hasn't come across a "groper". I have done, lots of times. A bloke puts his arm around you and you know he is trying to "cop a feel" - so you just roll your eyes and think "oh oh, one of those" and then you know to keep your distance.

If it's worse than that, i.e. someone actually trying to put his hand up your skirt then you tell them to bloody well keep their hands to themselves. I once did this in front of all this bloke's friends - he was red faced and embarrassed and his friends were all laughing. He NEVER touched me again!

Women should learn how to handle these things. It's no big deal, you tell them off and get on with it. Reporting it to the Police? I would expect to be told to grow up and learn how to look after myself. And as for waiting 40 years, please.

By the way, I am not including assaults on children or indeed cases of proper rape. Thank God that has never happened to me. I'm just talking about "groping", which so far seems to be the case so far as DLT is concerned.
Yorkie47 is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 08:46
davidmcn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 8,625
I absolutely do not put DLT in the same category as Hall and Saville. The complaints about him appear to have come from women who were adults at the time (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
We can't correct you as none of us actually knows what the complaints are - other than what DLT has said. As I said elsewhere, I very much doubt the police are spending time on allegations of mere historical bum-pinching.
davidmcn is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 08:49
IzzyS
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 9,174
I'm nodding as I'm reading all this, I agree with you.

I actually DID hear rumours about Stuart Hall back in the 70s but I didn't believe them. Then again, someone told me Rock Hudson was gay way back in the 60s and I didn't believe them either! I think I'm a bit naive!

I want to believe that Rolf Harris and Bill Roache are innocent and I refuse to be judge and jury until proved otherwise (unlike some posters on here).

I do think there's a major difference between "kiddy fiddling" and TV stars taking advantage of precocious under-age girls. Good grief, the prisons are going to be full of old rockers if this carries on!

Also, I don't think there's a woman alive who hasn't come across a "groper". I have done, lots of times. A bloke puts his arm around you and you know he is trying to "cop a feel" - so you just roll your eyes and think "oh oh, one of those" and then you know to keep your distance.

If it's worse than that, i.e. someone actually trying to put his hand up your skirt then you tell them to bloody well keep their hands to themselves. I once did this in front of all this bloke's friends - he was red faced and embarrassed and his friends were all laughing. He NEVER touched me again!

Women should learn how to handle these things. It's no big deal, you tell them off and get on with it. Reporting it to the Police? I would expect to be told to grow up and learn how to look after myself. And as for waiting 40 years, please.

By the way, I am not including assaults on children or indeed cases of proper rape. Thank God that has never happened to me. I'm just talking about "groping", which so far seems to be the case so far as DLT is concerned.
Re Bib - Its not 'no big deal' for everyone. While I agree, that is the best thing to do, certainly in the first instance, some people (adults) might find it hard to say anything out loud. I remember being told at work a few years ago by my colleagues that a student had been trying to get too close to them, when he needed computing help. It had happened a few times, I think the term wandering hands would be about the closest description. They suggested if he approached the desk for help, I try to help from the desk and not let him behind the desk, or if needed then ask whoever else is on shift to go to his machine and help and if I had to go to his machine then make sure I stand a few feet away. They were concerned because their alot more assertive than I am and were worried I'd be quite upset and not be able to tell him to stop if he did something inappropriate.

Both in and out of work I've attended assertiveness and confidence training due to how incredibly shy I can be but I guess im naturally insular. I think im a bit better than I used to be many years ago but im not sure how I'd react if that happened - I'd probably clam right up and go bright red, I'd imagine

I'm just saying, it can be easier for some people to swiftly address such situations than others. Its not right to be so shy or to not be assertive, its something to be worked on but equally, its not right for the other person to feel people up either. I think its a bit harsh to be told to grow up if you reported someone being inappropriate - inappropriate behaviour isn't right (by definition), no matter what the age.

It is a complicated issue though and I'm not sure if many decades later, I'd feel it right to take to court an allegation of minor assault.
IzzyS is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 09:09
andyrich666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 67
RE Groping - Whilst I don't condone that behaviour, and is very unnaceptable in the age we live in now,

It still happens now, even last night if you watch the Darts, the guys there try and grope the girls that lead on the Dart players.

Whilst researching this I never realised that Phil Taylor is also a known sex offender

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-assaults.html
andyrich666 is offline  
 
Closed Thread



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:35.