I'm a curious type too, and I'm interested in your opinion. Why do you feel that the judge incorrectly concluded that the evidence presented to him was fabricated?

I personally think the only thing to do now for him to save some honour is a simple "I am sorry" ...I got it wrong I made mistakes I am human I am not perfect ..I did things I regret...part company with Claire and can , move forward and grow up but above all be honest ...I may just have more respect than this holier than tho act

Or maybe Fake by Alexander O'Neal

Why is this load of nonsense being discussed ON A DANCE FORUM ?
It is all irrelevant . I don't care about his private life unless he actually literally murdered someone or morphed into jimmy saville .
The dedication to discussing this man negatively endlessly repetitively in depth day after day after day is one of the weirdest things I've ever seen on Strictly .He is just 'someone' , not a world leader or anyone whose deeds affect those on here .

It's a dance discussion forum , not a gossip site for dissecting someone's personal life and I hope this thread gets reported and moved to whatever bin it belongs in .

As regards his dancing , I hope he does well tonight and doesn't allow whatever is going on in his private life to affect him .

This /\ /\ /\

Presumably you read the thread in order to draw conclusions on the content and quote other posts. Can I ask why, if the subject matter is not of interest to you?

Good grief! How very commendable! I thought people were just using an Internet forum to have a good old gossip and express a certain amount of schadenfreude. I didn't realise they were motivated by nobler considerations. A quest for the truth, no less!

Can someone explain why I'm not supposed to find the summing up of a Judge in a court case that has been played out in the press interesting or why it is out of bounds for comment because one of the protagonists is playing dress up on Saturday night tele?

I completely agree with you, but this happens every year with some celebrities, the amount of negative comments about Jason Donovan was amazing and, of course, I can guarantee there'll be a negative thread about James Jordan as soon as Strictly starts, I don't read tabloid newspapers or watch any reality programmes apart from Strictly so don't know much about Peter's private life but I do enjoy his dancing and also hope he does well tonight

Every article about this is making sure to call him an SCD star. The photos used are the promo shots for SCD. Is it so odd that people watching SCD may be interested in it? It isn't really a dancing show, it's a celebrity show with some dancing.

Besides, personal things have been talked about before. Ricky Whittle's run-in with the law, Anita Rani's episode of Who Do You Think You Are, pregnancies - they've all been discussed here.

But the readers of this magazines and watchers of that telly that you so snidely dismiss, are PAs target audience. After all Trash TV and low rent magazines have been his source of income for at least a decade now.

Because you're only supposed to care about the dancing, always the dancing. Nothing else. Rien. Nada. Niente. Niets.

IT'S ALL ABOUT THE DANCING PEOPLE! YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE OPINIONS OF THEM AS PERSONALITIES - IT'S IRRELEVANT.














(b*ll*cks)

It's a game, and one that you're not obviously playing correctly.
The correct procedure is to read the thread, ask people to explain the case to you, then sneer at people for discussing it. The moral high ground is located at the precise longitude and latitude of your own level of interest, and anyone with a greater or lesser level of interest is by necessity a target for your disdain.
Once you have located a poster who doesn't share your precise level of interest, you must set your condescension distributors to 'maximum superiority'. That makes you the winner.

Indeed. In fact, without these so called low rent rags and reality tv, Peter Andre wouldn't be anywhere near SCD as he'd have been completely forgotten by all but his most ardent fans many years ago.
Selling his private life is the only thing that's given him any sort of relevance in the last decade

So what ? That's just lazy journos who can't be bothered looking for any photos other than the most recent handy ones .
It most certainly is NOT a celebrity show with 'some dancing'. It's a dancing show . There are no psychologists or journos or fans doing the judging are there ? It's people highly involved in the dance world . Big clue right there .
He lost a court case , big deal , people need to get over it as I'm sure he will .

Eh?

I clicked a thread about an SCD contestant which doesn't seem entirely unreasonable on an internet forum about SCD. I read a comment about people's strange obsession with sleb gossip with which I completely agreed. I posted that I did.

I think you might be reading too much in to it. So, as I said above, eh?

I'm all for giving celebs the benefit of the doubt. I don't believe that having a 'normal level' of media presence makes one public property, but Peter is one of those 'celebs' who has made being in the media his very living and existence. It seems silly to expect people to ignore this current story just because it's inconvenient. Without stories in the press (and people talking about them), the likes of Peter would disappear in a puff of smoke.

He happens to be plying his trade on Strictly at the moment, so that's where he's being discussed.

Has strictly not started, I could have sworn I watched it last week and the week before?

In fact didn't PA dance on it ?

Hence the relevance of this discussion, a celeb on a show I like has been shown to be a liar, out for himself causing damage and financial hardship to others.

In fairness this case is essentially about the cancellation of a show, the show presumably had a lot of people working on it, by lying who knows what harm he caused to the crew on the show?
who I sincerely hope have found other work.

Honestly as far as I can see it shows PA has a disrespect for people that I personally don't like, even if he danced like Fred Astaire I would never vote for him because of this.

Ditto that Widdecome woman, I almost stopped watching the show when they decided to try to make a national treasure out of someone who used her power to make prisoners give birth in handcuffs. She would never have a single vote from me.

Personalities do count when deciding who I would like to win.

SCD is what is making him relevant and press-worthy at the minute.

I watch it for the dancing. There have been people on it I've never heard of and I can enjoy their dancing - that's why I enjoyed Strictly Dance Fever and SYTYCD too. But really, there's only one judge with Latin and Ballroom experience, some of the pros aren't that experienced at what they're doing, American Smooth is a dance effectively invented for SCD so isn't particularly authentic. Hence a celebrity show with some dancing. I'd be happy for it to be celeb free, but pros can change, dances can change, judges can change, hosts can change - the one thing the show can't do without is a fresh crop of celebs every year.

Peter Andre 'told to butch up by Strictly partner Janette Manrara'... as he insists he's had no dance training
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...-training.html

Someone ought to tell Delta Goodrum that, she said he had Nancy years of dance experience

I have to say I don't like his dancing as each week has been like a pop video showcasing what he can already do rather than learning a new dance every week.

Yet another reason not to vote for him.

He didn't 'lose a court case', He was called as a witness and found to be unreliable and unsatisfactory.
I believe the court case that he can be in a position to actually lose is coming next year but the judges summing up of this case means maybe that one won't be as cut and dried a victory as some may have predicted

Being told to 'butch up' seems a tad unfortunate, when this week's outfit includes a long brunette wig, 57 tonnes of guyliner and high heeled boots.
Perhaps that is 'butching up' for Peter?

You mean apart from the fans who phone in or go online to vote every week - taking into account anything from pretty dress to who rings the loudest and all the other technical points in between before deciding who to vote for?

Indeed. And had his 'side' won this court case, and had the judge called him a credible witness, rather than a disingenuous, self-serving chancer, that would have been discussed with equal interest. And relish.