Starmer-rama and the warped Crusaders.
The urbane Kier Starmer and the somewhat more downmarket, but undoubtedly charming, Kieran Parsons (pictured left) may not appear to have much in common – but they are both looking to cure their unemployment problems by clinging to the tail of the same Tiger. A Tiger called ‘victimhood’.
Not that either of them seek to be ‘victims’. Good Lord No! They have both seen the fame and the fortune of other men, previously unemployed and bereft of income, who have positioned themselves in the burgeoning market of evangelising TV celebrity and moral guardian.
Kier Starmer has laid out his ‘Starmer-rama‘ – a woolly wide-eyed perspective of how, now that he is no longer in secure employment as an essential cog of the English judicial system, he could, or would, continue to meddle in its affairs. Presumably we have to be daft enough to vote him into place as a Member of Parliament first, but I guess in somewhere like Hartlepool, that could be arranged.
“Criminal Justice fails the Vulnerable” he whines. That in itself is a deeply troubling prospect, after all, our criminal justice was fashioned a millennium ago specifically to protect the vulnerable against the power of the Crown; if it still can’t do that…
What Kier means, I assume, is that having been told repeatedly by Kier’s like minded friends, lawyers, ‘victim advocates’ and assorted moral guardians that no matter how ludicrous their evidence, ‘they will be believed’ – some witnesses in court cases, and inquests, are reeling away from recent show trials in total shock at finding that ‘Criminal Justice’ doesn’t mean one more gentle romp through your ‘credible evidence’ with a suitably sensitive ‘accredited counsellor’. It actually means that 12 ordinary men and women from your local neighbourhood may well decide that the ‘credible evidence’ ain’t so flipping credible once it leaves the consulting rooms of the gullible.
Indeed, some of those juries have responded with the – what is the correct legal term for this? (Let me consult the august ex-Director of Public Prosecutions, he surely has the perfect quasi-legal term for the occasion – there it is…..!) “Fuck-off” they say, “we don’t believe you”. When you have spent months being groomed by people who have been on the all the right ‘victim-aware’ courses, undergoing appraisal by common-sense-Joe-Public-in-the-street can be a traumatising experience. It’s called a jury, Kier – not criminal justice ‘system’, you and that Vera retrained the rest of the donkeys – but you can’t figure a way in which to send every last person liable to be called for jury duty onto ‘victim-aware’ courses, to be denuded of common sense. He appears to think that the delicate anonymous victims shouldn’t even be in a court room – that is only for the named and shamed guilty men….
Kieran, on the other hands, is perfectly happy with the judicial system as it is. He wishes to make more use of it. Having witnessed the meteoric rise to fame and fortune of others who once pounded the streets looking for discarded chewing gum, he fancied the same career path. No qualifications? Tick. Unemployed? Tick. Friends in the TV and light entertainment business? – er No! Kieran was enterprising though. Full marks to him.
With a mobile phone and a Youtube account, anyone can be a child protection expert and TV journalist these days. Kieran goes on line to 18 + dating sites, chats up lonely old men, then arranges to meet them. Just as they are about to meet, he sends them a text message telling them that actually he, or rather the ‘she‘ ‘he‘ is meant to be, is actually 11 or 14 or any age under 18 – and confronts them as they flee with noisy allegations that they are a ‘paedophile’. The resulting mobile phone images are displayed on Youtube. ‘Credible allegations’, see.
Kieran’s Youtube footage of lonely bewildered old men fleeing from violent confrontation with a trio of tattooed hoodies has now become so popular that Channel 4 have offered him his own programme slot…though Warwickshire Police don’t seem too enamoured of this rival to Mark Williams-Thomas’s ‘To catch a predator’ on ITV.
At first sight, it is not obvious why they are not so keen on Kieran following in Mark’s footsteps to fame and fortune – perhaps it is something to do with Mark having the wit to only target harmless dead or foreign paedophiles – whereas Kieran and his friends have left a distressing trail behind them of suicides; turf wars (there are only so many paedophiles to go round folks!); threats to ‘out’ not just paedophiles but paedo-hunters as well; injuries to life and limb, and copy cat attempts by others trying to climb the greasy ladder of TV celebrity paedo-hunter.
All in all, Kieran, alias ‘Stinson Hunter’, is keeping Warwickshire Police pretty busy, which must be jolly annoying when they are fully occupied trawling back through their records to find out whether they ever did hear anything about an 83 year old TV celebrity who may or may not have put his hand on the bum of a teen-age fan, 50 years ago. Doesn’t Kieran realise that the Police have real work to do!
So what will the BBC do about this two pronged attack on their ratings? Kit out Kier Starmer in pink underpants and a wig to prowl the streets of Salford as the star of ‘Paedo-hunter – the public service version’? (Available on BBC iPlayer).
‘Be careful out there, the streets are getting crowded’!
- Moor Larkin
February 5, 2014 at 2:42 pm - Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 2:46 pm -
MP? In Hartlepool?
Standing as H’Angus the Lawyer? Or as H’Angus and Flogus?
I’m sure that the good, solid, people of Hartlepool of the early 1800s would have voted for either of those in droves. They weren’t entirely stupid
- Mudplugger
February 5, 2014 at 8:28 pm -
Stupid or not, they voted there for the slippery metropolitan Peter Mandelson, despite his alleged confusion in the local Hartlepool chippie, thinking the steaming vat of mushy peas was guacamole.
- Ho Hum
February 6, 2014 at 12:21 am -
Yes, but that was in the ‘post democratic era’, was it not?
- Ho Hum
- Mudplugger
- Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 3:10 pm -
Anyway, Anna, apart from the Victimological Drama-Rama, thanks for highlighting the ‘Warped Crusader’ thing
Done a bit of quick reading up on it, and it’s quite appalling. You must have some contacts somewhere that can help Channel 4 see the light on this nonsense, no?
- Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 3:37 pm -
Interesting word, is ‘qualitative’
If one is more manifestly horrible than the other, as might reasonable be argued here, do you leave the worse, just because the less worse is less easy to deal with?
Just asking
- Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 3:38 pm -
Not sure what went wrong there, but that was response to
‘Anna Raccoon February 5, 2014 at 3:20 pm’ - Moor Larkin
February 5, 2014 at 3:40 pm -
Anna seemed to be saving there was no qualitative difference, so best decide what you’re arguing about before you start.
- Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 3:59 pm -
Ethically, sure, there is little difference. But otherwise I can’t see that there is no qualitative difference between people who seem to act like thugs, and do things in a manner that can only but encourage thugs, and those who I may equally well not like, on the grounds of their ethical equivalence, but who at least don’t go about things without taking what seem to be, even if only slightly more, reasonable steps to avoid incitement of the pitchfork wielding massed plebs.
I’m just not sure that both might be quite at home leading such in Salem, or Chelmsford, but it was the Christians of both eras and places who got those who would lead the mob, stared down.
- Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 4:10 pm -
Well, FWIW, I have just made a complaint to Channel 4, highlighting for them what they are supposed to be commissioning, and referring them to the Warwickshire Police Statement. Let’s see if that makes any difference.
- Ho Hum
- Ho Hum
- Ho Hum
- Moor Larkin
February 5, 2014 at 4:09 pm -
Okay. Okay. So Mark is worse, but he probably means well too.
- Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 4:11 pm -
I had it the other way round LOL
- Ho Hum
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 5, 2014 at 4:43 pm -
Meanwhile, we are all disgusted by the gangs of rabid homophobes who’ve been let off the leash in Putin’s Russia and who are charging round Sochi picking on any poor young man who looks reasonably well-groomed and inoffensive. They feel they not only have a moral duty to clean up the streets, but more importantly the State wishes them well – after all isn’t that the message they’ve been getting from the Kremlin itself?
So who are we to get all up in Putin’s face? Sauce, gander, goose.
- Ho Hum
February 5, 2014 at 4:53 pm -
Yeah. Saw that on the Channel 4 webpage. Talk about double standards and hypocrisy.
- Ho Hum
- Duncan Disorderly
February 5, 2014 at 4:59 pm -
Kier Starmer is very unlikely to be as vague and woolly minded as his article suggests he is. I suggest instead he is entering politician mode – lots of wibble about things that must be made better without instructions on how to do it. How would his ‘Victim’s Law’ approach a man whose wife has been murdered, and the perpetrator is not obvious? Statistically, this man is likely to have committed the crime, but of course he is also quite possibly innocent. Are the police allowed to ask him hard-ball questions, or not?
- Moor Larkin
February 5, 2014 at 5:06 pm -
I honestly think he’s in a state of complete mental breakdown. His face looks empty and his eyes blank. Tough at the top….
- Ho Hum
February 6, 2014 at 12:27 am -
Has he been influenced unduly by Gordon Brown, then?
- Moor Larkin
February 6, 2014 at 11:45 am -
The Rise of the Morons perhaps
- Moor Larkin
- Ho Hum
- Moor Larkin
- sally stevens
February 5, 2014 at 5:29 pm -
Well, I tweeted MarkWT this morning (or your early evening in Europe), just asking him what he thought of the press release from the Yard regarding the DNA exoneration. Not that I care about his opinion all that much, but thought it might be an opportunity to get the word out to the loyal MWT troops, who might at this point be wondering wtf that’s all about. Ironically, he was informing the huddled masses that the Roache jury is now out, and M’lud has cautioned the jury to be careful when considering the verdict.
- Moor Larkin
February 5, 2014 at 5:52 pm -
I wonder if it’s made any impression on the reptiles at Icke Towers yet. They usually only pick up on what’s in the Daily Mail…..
- sally stevens
February 5, 2014 at 5:57 pm -
And because I couldn’t resist, I went back and addressed the issue of Princess Alexandra at Duncroft. MWT says that Jimmy was “with” her at Duncroft, when in fact, as a patron of MIND she was already at the school, meeting with Lady Norman and Margaret Jones. Jimmy arrived on his own, some time after Princess A and her lady-in-waiting had arrived. This is how stupid rumors get started. Yes, they were at Duncroft for the purposes of fund-raising, but they were not ‘with’ each other. They knew each other from the charity circuit and as Princess A was quite a young woman at that time (38), she was likely a pop music fan to some extent.
We’ll see if Mark addresses either of these tweets. Right now he’s on Roache patrol.
- Moor Larkin
- Ian B
February 5, 2014 at 6:50 pm -
Just imagine the fun that could have been had in the old gay-bashing days, if they’d had mobile phones with cameras, and Youtube. And that’s the thing, isn’t it? The paedo is the new homo. But even moreso.
- sally stevens
February 6, 2014 at 12:54 am -
Looks like our Mark didn’t make the Broadcasting Awards cut for the expose, “It’s an honor to be nominated, bla, bla,” he tweets, and off he goes on some secret squirrel mission of such a sensitive nature that he can’t tell us, in case we care. Maybe it involves someone’s underwear drawer.
- sally stevens
- GildasTheMonk
February 6, 2014 at 7:38 am -
“keeping police pretty busy, which must be jolly annoying when they are fully occupied trawling back through their records to find out whether they ever did hear anything about an 83 year old TV celebrity who may or may not have put his hand on the bum of a teen-age fan, 50 years ago….”
I think that sums it up nicely. - Ian B
February 6, 2014 at 11:35 am -
Roache acquitted on all counts!
- SpectrumIsGreen
February 6, 2014 at 11:40 am -
Just shows what happens when these cases are put before a jury. I predict the same result for the Hairy Cornflake.
- Eddy
February 6, 2014 at 12:34 pm -
Yesssssssssssss! Excellent.
- Duncan Disorderly
February 6, 2014 at 1:00 pm -
From this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26068034
“The prosecution had accused Mr Roache of using his fame and popularity to exploit the girls and said that, if the actor was telling the truth, he was the victim of a “huge, distorted and perverse witch-hunt”.But Louise Blackwell QC, defending, said the women’s evidence “lacked sense and credibility”.
In court, the woman making the rape claims changed her mind about how old she was at the time.
Another woman initially told police she was warned about Mr Roache by actor Johnny Briggs, who played Mike Baldwin, but when it was discovered he was not in the show at the time she said the warning had come from a different actor.”
This shows the difficulty of prosecuting alleged crimes dating back half a century, and where there the only evidence was people’s quite possibly warped memories. Had he been found guilty, the shitstorm of prosecutions that could have ensued would be fearsome.
- SpectrumIsGreen
- Ho Hum
February 6, 2014 at 12:12 pm -
Roache not guilty? But that’s not fair on the victims, is it?
- Corevalue
February 6, 2014 at 12:22 pm -
And what’s this in the Mail?
“The prolific paedophile – who could have sexually assaulted 300 victims – was a possible suspect in a number of other serious attacks, including murder.”
“…could have assaulted……….possible suspect……”?
I thought the Mail were absolutely sure in their prognostications, following the Yewtree report. Are we starting to see a gradual shift of position?
- Moor Larkin
February 6, 2014 at 12:35 pm -
300 victims? It was 1300 the other week.
Are some of our victims missing m’lud?- Duncan Disorderly
February 6, 2014 at 1:03 pm -
I wonder if anyone has plotted the number of Savile victims against time. “It is estimated that by 2019, seven out of every four people will have been abused by Savile.”
- Ian B
February 6, 2014 at 2:31 pm -
They have been “disappeared” by the lizard alien paedo Illuminati.
- Duncan Disorderly
- Moor Larkin
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 6, 2014 at 1:04 pm -
Re: Roach
“During the trial the prosecution offered no evidence on one of two counts of indecent assault, relating to one complainant, as she had ‘no actual memory of the episode’.”Dear Gog alrighty.
This is not going to stop the internet loons claiming the Roach trial was deliberately engineered (ie they picked on someone who clearly wasn’t guilty ) so as to discredit other, genuine complainants because there are Really Big Serious Names being protected by the Establishment. Sowing the seeds of doubt etc etc.
That’s why the whole mess is clearly faith-based. You don’t need any evidence at all if you are a true believer in vast, international satanic conspiracies headed up by Tory politicians and BBC light entertainment. Whatever the outcome of any trial or investigation, it all goes to show that there is a conspiracy …
- Ian Reid
February 6, 2014 at 1:35 pm -
How can someone possibly be charged with an offence that no-one has any memory of. I assume whoever made that allegation must have decided their evidence wouldn’t stand scrutiny in a courtroom, and chickened out at the last minute. Those pesky juries heh.
On a positive note kudos to Coronation Street for taking Roache, and Le Vell back, I’m not so sure the BBC would have done that.
Incidentally I don’t think Roache did himself any favours by appearing on Piers Morgan’s Life Stories. See http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4196514/Corrie-star-Bill-Roache-Ive-slept-with-1000-women.html
That probably contributed to him becoming a target. I rather fancy we might be seeing fewer of these sorts of stories in the future.
- Ian B
February 6, 2014 at 1:50 pm -
How can someone possibly be charged with an offence that no-one has any memory of.
In this new form of justice, they have basically abandoned the whole fundamental concept of corpus delicti; at least, the prosecutory authorities have. It is beyond belief that a person can be charged on no more basis than somebody having a vague feeling that a crime may have occurred. But that is where we are.
- Moor Larkin
February 6, 2014 at 2:31 pm -
@Ian Reid re. making yourself a target:
Darling Ch4 Leftie Jon Snow recently said that he cannot meet a woman without thinking of sex [with her].
Bang ‘im up my luvverlies.- sally stevens
February 6, 2014 at 5:33 pm -
I think that was a quote from When Harry Met Sally.
- sally stevens
- Ian B
- Ian B
February 6, 2014 at 1:36 pm -
The Telegraph are running with a “got away with it, no justice for victims” narrative-
“Emboldened by the Savile scandal, they told police of rapes and indecent assaults they said Roache had carried out when they were 14 and 15, but half a lifetime later, they are left having to come to terms with the fact that they are still not believed.”
Sigh.
- Moor Larkin
February 6, 2014 at 1:38 pm -
What a curious editorial line to take………..
- sally stevens
February 6, 2014 at 5:32 pm -
They weren’t believed because they were lying. I think anyone with half a brain can figure that one out.
- Moor Larkin
- Paul
February 6, 2014 at 8:47 pm -
That very thing has been said to me this afternoon at work, by the actual person who first informed me of the Not Guilty verdicts (Roache).
“It’s all a conspiracy so that the excuse will soon be wheeled out that there’s nothing to any of these allegations and it’s all costing too much money” (of which would be true of course) – he insisted. Then of course the Royals and politicians were mentioned.
It will be interesting to see what actually does eventually happen re the Police and CPS attitude to these prosecutions. And there are of course very real budgets to consider despite brave-sounding claims that the cops will never shirk from looking at these matters – cue the comments from Lancs Police after the acquittal today.
And yet of course, we actually DO want the Police to be investigating these matters, in the ‘normal’ course of events.
What’s normal now in Britain? Search me, nearly all the country seems insane in one or more different ways.
When (or if) the cops say they can no longer pursue with such resource and vigour – they’ll be publicly crucified on the charge of a ‘cover-up’ and in addition they may very well ignore genuine cases by way of a blanket refusal in this type of crime.
I can’t believe I’ve just said that. That the Police might ignore a specific crime because of the over-popularity and cost of such in a previous era. But that is what may happen.
Have the cops got any form, any ‘previous’ that we, the jury, might wish to consider with regard to ignoring cases of abuse? Well yes actually – massively so, and we all know who the perpetrators actually turned out to be.
This is where we’ve landed now – that very real and serious cases of child abuse, eminently provable, recent and even current and by multiple perpetrators have been systematically ignored. Conversely, ancient and dubious claims by unreliable witnesses are being pursued with zeal. You couldn’t make it up at all.
And we’re all paying for it, keystone cops included.
The only thing that throws me and seriously is – Stuart Hall.
- Ho Hum
February 6, 2014 at 9:32 pm -
My recollection is that Anna, in her previous incarnation, said just that. The real victims of all these shenanigans, and the zealots making a living from them, will be those young children who suffered real abuse and who, in the future, no-one will listen to, or take any action on behalf of, or believe in any court case, as a result of a jaundiced public reaction, fed most probably by the probable forthcoming press recantations and reversions, – think on the opportunities there for the media to spin this out and sell more dross to a gullible public – to the extent that this all may culminate in proper prosecutions actually not being progressed.
Sad, isn’t it?
- Paul
February 7, 2014 at 9:28 am -
Yes I’m aware that Anna, and others (everyone sensible) has pointed to this very real problem likely to emerge. It’s completely topsy-turvy. The most astonishing thing is that ostensibly (?) intelligent people, all kinds of powerful people, are going along with all this – the Police themselves, right down from the top, the media, the judiciary. They’ve whipped up the mob in so doing and are happy to lie abed with the said mob. But they can’t really be that stupid – can they? So the only other reason is simply – pure wickedness!
- Paul
- Ian B
February 6, 2014 at 10:35 pm -
What throws you about Stuart Hall? He was sucker punched with a plea bargain. Elderly man, great list of complaints, police saying he’s got no chance of acquittal but if he pleads guilty he’ll get a lighter sentence and avoid dying in prison. So, guilty plea. Then once he’s inside, “the Abuse Movement” call the special red telephone in Keir Starmer’s office, he gets the sentence doubled, and Plod turn to round two. What Plod overlooked was that having stitched up Hall, nobody else was going to be suckered by a guilty plea deal.
- Paul
February 7, 2014 at 9:46 am -
Yes well it does seem like (it could be) that way. Otherwise he is truly Guilty.
I can’t get my head around it still. Why would anyone plead guilty to something, especially a very serious crime, if they weren’t? I’m positive I never would. I know I could be frightened and pressured by the cops but I’m sure my resolve would overcome that fear. I suppose the only situation where I would make a false confession is where my family might be mentioned for additional and future persecution. But we aren’t living in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia – not quite yet!
But that’s me – I’m not Stuart Hall. Poor sod if that’s what he’s done, but weak-minded too I have to say. Imagine how he will be pondering that weakness now.
- Ian B
February 7, 2014 at 1:34 pm -
I think maybe you’re underestimating how terrifying such a situation is. We do not have overt thuggery from the State, but is extremely powerful and scary.
Also, he is elderly. He is around the same age as my father. My sister and I have discussed how, in the past few years, Dad is simply less capable of handling stresses (as when he recently moved house) than he used to be, and we have to take that into account when dealing with matters that may cause stress. My father has never been “weak minded”, but the thought of him having to handle such a situation is terrifying. I doubt he would.
By coincidence, I saw him yesterday; we briefly discussed the Roache case because it is in the news. He said how it worries him a bit; he has spent his life in the brass band movement, leading bands and teaching numerous youngsters. It would only take one to invent a complaint… And this is the point really; we’re now in this situation that amounts to a lottery. I keep using this adjective, but it really is terrifying.
I wonder if many women, including even those who associate with this blog- no disrespect intended- quite grasp the enormity of the situation that men, as a class, are in at the moment.
- Moor Larkin
February 7, 2014 at 2:16 pm -
Hall’s son is a lawyer and Hall was very ebullient at first. Maybe it was just about the money. Le Vell said he had to spend a quarter mill. Davidson never got to court but reckons it cost him £400k. Hall signed over his house to his wife the media told us – to swindle his victims the paper’s said – maybe he just wanted to keep it out of the hands of the thieving legal profession and at his age figures he might just as well be in the nick as an old folks home. Unlike everyone else, maybe he was just thinking about the children.
- Ian B
- Paul
- Ho Hum
- Ian Reid
- Ellen
February 6, 2014 at 1:08 pm -
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr – I’m so up an down today, one minute happy the next I’m wanting to slot someone!
Thanks God for you guys – wonder if Bill will help us?
E xxx
- Ellen
February 6, 2014 at 1:08 pm -
Obviously cross my typing is horrid – sorry!
- Bob J
February 6, 2014 at 1:48 pm -
If you look on twitter you will despair.
- Mr Ecks
February 6, 2014 at 2:18 pm -
Never despair.
If the mass of human beings were not of low intelligence and high credulity the world would not be as it is. It has always been that way. A great mass of hatred seethes beneath human life–hatred caused mainly be the rotten things life does to us all. We can be angry at nothing (if you are atheist) angry at God (if you believe) or try to take it out on our fellow human beings (if a justification or an excuse can by tricked up by ourselves or those who would exploit us).
- Mr Ecks
February 6, 2014 at 2:19 pm - Paul
February 7, 2014 at 9:47 am -
Never truer words there. That’s the deal – the masses are just lumpen and will remain ever so.
Intelligence can be a burden sometimes.
- Moor Larkin
February 7, 2014 at 11:46 am -
The solution to resolving the clash of “Mob Rule vs Wisdom of Crowds” is called Reason, and even the most stupid and uneducated respond to reason – if they get the chance to hear it. If they didn’t, we’d still be living in tribes and collecting scalps. Not that the Savage isn’t noble of course….
- Moor Larkin
- Mr Ecks
- Mr Ecks
- Ellen
- JuliaM
February 6, 2014 at 1:34 pm -
A telling paragraph:
“Halfway through the trial, Nazir Afzal, chief crown prosecutor for the north-west, slipped in to court. Spotted by a reporter, he insisted his presence did not indicate nervousness at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).”
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/06/william-roache-acquittal-inconsistent-testimonies
- Duncan Disorderly
February 6, 2014 at 2:46 pm -
I see from that story that Roache also owned a time travelling Rolls-Royce:
“That woman’s sister, now 57, was criticised by the defence for the account she gave the court about being assaulted by Roache in his gold Rolls-Royce – a car which Roache did not in fact own until 1986, according to a hire purchase agreement produced by his barrister.”
- Duncan Disorderly
- Bob J
February 6, 2014 at 1:45 pm -
Given the number of accusers in the Savile, Roache, DLT etc etc cases would the police be cross-referencing all these individuals? It would be interesting to see if there are multiple accusers, links between accusers etc. I doubt whether the authorities are interested but it could be enlightening.
- Cloudberry
April 15, 2015 at 3:02 pm -
I have been wondering that too. Also how many have been involved in some kind of fraud, e.g. benefits, insurance, credit-card, etc.
- Cloudberry
- Mr Ecks
February 6, 2014 at 2:09 pm -
Good.
The liars have failed against Levail, Freddie Starr and now Bill Roche and hopefully soon against DLT and Rolf. I bet Stuart Hall now wishes he had took his chance on an innocent plea and told them to stuff their plea bargain. He was the first and thus most vulnerable to the CPS/cop lies. I understand (I read it but can’t recall where) that they now intend a new trial for Hall on new charges– 18 counts of alleged rape. The theory being that a guilty verdict in a sex crime case is certain against a man who has already in jail for (bogus IMO) sex crimes. If the report I read is correct then this is a dangerous time for the Yewtree gang. They desperately need another success and the theory mentioned above suggests they should go forward with another Hall trial. . If however the sense shown by Juries so far prevails and the “18 rapes” crap falls apart that would at least give hope for a (judicial?) review of the original Hall trial (can you appeal against a conviction after you were conned into pleading guilty?–I am no lawyer but I don’t think you can). If that verdict was overturned then Yewtree would be in ruins –“lie in ruins” would be a better and more ironic way of putting it–and all eyes should then turn back to the accusations against Jimmy Saville. Time the veracity of those were tested for objective truth.
- Eyes Wide Shut
February 6, 2014 at 2:28 pm -
And someone ought to look at all the bloody money that has gone to mounting prosecutions based on “I think something might have happened to me once but I don’t know what it is is – oh hold on, there was a repeat of “Last of the Summer Wine” last night and it’s all coming back to me: those filthy wellies, those wrinkled stockings, dear God, the horror, the horror”.
Will they? I very much doubt it.
- Paul
February 6, 2014 at 9:16 pm -
That points to one very real ‘establishment conspiracy’. The legal profession have done very well out of it, thank-you very much. As always.
I presume also that Mr Roache wasn’t the recipient of legal aid? So he’s paid for his own defence team and how much has that cost? So now he’s Not Guilty is he entitled to claim that money back ….. from whom? It’s hardly likely. So at the least it’s another instance of wealth-stripping from a wealthy but innocent man. A Marxist dream for sure – except all the wealth has gone to well-heeled barristers & co.
- Paul
- Eyes Wide Shut
- sally stevens
February 6, 2014 at 5:52 pm -
Blogged and shared over on Twitter. http://rockphiles.typepad.com/a_life_in_the_day/2014/02/compensation-street.html
- Carol42
February 6, 2014 at 6:34 pm -
I just can’t figure out how these cases were ever brought, it seems impossible to bring a case against someone after forty years just because an allegation is made, I certainly wouldn’t convict on that basis, I don’t think any sane person would. I think maybe it is reaching a turning point as it eventually did with the ‘satanic abuse’ nonsense people simply stopped believing as the claims became more and more hysterical . Just maybe Jimmy Savile will get some justice too but I doubt it.
- Ian B
February 6, 2014 at 8:30 pm -
Bear in mind that these are just celebrity cases, so you’re hearing about them. Other unknown men have been going to jail on similar charges, largely ignored by the big newspapers. They get a mention in the local rag. I read one some time ago- sorry, didn’t bookmark it. The man was supposed to have committed a sexual assault on two girls, when he was 14, in 1966. And was convicted. It’s incomprhensible that there could have been any actual evidence.
Whether he did or not of course I have no idea; the point is that these famous Yewtree cases are not the only ones.
- Ian B
- Carol42
February 6, 2014 at 6:35 pm -
Don’t know if my comment went through with the box ticked.
- Sarah Finch
February 16, 2014 at 3:27 am -
Here’s a short Youtube video of Stinson Hunter http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=jJ-qwjKTEw0
{ 79 comments… read them below or add one }