File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

(For General Discussion)

Moderators: Jason, Toothy, Tonyblack

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Jan Van Quirm » Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:43 pm

Catch-up wrote:But people have shared some very personal things just to illustrate these points and I think it's important to acknowledge that.

And Batty has acknowledged that Catch-up and shared some of her own experiences as well, so it's not as if she's saying this girl is a liar, just that the report doesn't co-incide with her own perception of Starr. That's an opinion that's as valid as wanting to believe the allegation is probably true and Batty is arguably more sensible in following a long-held association than automatically assuming that it's true so long after the fact and potentially taken out of context?

This is the problem with public personalities and 'no smoke without fire' thinking - one adverse word, true or no, could make or potentially or break a reputation, which is why official enquiries never name people until they're sure they have sufficient evidence to move on it, because they may not have the 'right' information to act on. The perhaps related case about the Tory MP is a good example - that carries far worse allegations than the one Starr is responding to, of his own volition, and because it's highly likely arrests and custodial sentences will be made when the investigation is over it's only natural justice not to name suspects ahead of their being formally arrested or brought in for questioning, otherwise it's guilty until proved innocent isn't it?

For some crimes that might be a more fitting approach perhaps, but the chances of punishing someone who may in fact not be guilty at all is why the burden of showing proof is on the prosecution and enshrined in English law, no matter what the Red Top press like to think. Naming names and tossing them in the mud before a police enquiry is even conceived is potentially as bad as groping a defenceless child because mud sticks on reputations and careers. :? Perhaps we should turn this around and cast the press in the wrong here for this woman's sake as well as Starr's - it's just that he's the one with the public profile and so he's easier to vilify. By the same token, because she's come forward to the media instead of the police, she's also put her motivations on the line by courting publicity in the first place and laid herself open to opinions like Batty and mine - potentially she's bringing evidence to prominence in the wrong way so her version of the truth is tainted already? :roll:
"Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that never were and ask why not.” George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Jan Van Quirm
Member
 
Posts: 10635
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: Dunheved, Kernow

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Dotsie » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:15 pm

All this woman has done is spoken out about abuse. But the opinion of a number of people on here is that she's lying - you should be detectives! The case appears to be closed against this woman already, which isn't open minded at all. I too don't believe that a man should be condemned on the report of one person, and if there's no other evidence then he should get off (innocent until proven guilty after all). But that doesn't mean that this woman is just after her 15 minutes of fame.

So does everyone believe her that she was molested by Saville, or is that potentially a lie too? She came forward before the media circus.
What's up with this glass? Excuse me? Excuse me? This is my glass? I don't think so. My glass was full! And it was a bigger glass!
User avatar
Dotsie
Member
 
Posts: 9426
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:07 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Dotsie » Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:20 pm

Jan Van Quirm wrote:He's responded to this accusation very swiftly and publicly several days ago and said he'd welcome a police interview - not exactly the actions of a man with some gruesome secret to hide

He lied about having met her, and about being on the programme, which are exactly the actions of a man with a gruesome secret to hide. Telling the truth from the start would have helped his case.

BTW, to everyone who thinks that one incident of groping a minor doesn't make him a paedophile, would it if she was 6, rather than 14? Is it her age that makes you think she's probably lying, or him not a paedophile? It seems that some people think that even if he did do it, it wasn't that big a deal anyway!
What's up with this glass? Excuse me? Excuse me? This is my glass? I don't think so. My glass was full! And it was a bigger glass!
User avatar
Dotsie
Member
 
Posts: 9426
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:07 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Jan Van Quirm » Sun Nov 04, 2012 10:18 pm

Dotsie wrote:He lied about having met her, and about being on the programme, which are exactly the actions of a man with a gruesome secret to hide. Telling the truth from the start would have helped his case.

He said he couldn't remember ever meeting her or being on the programme - is it a crime not to have total recall about something 30 years ago and you've a history of being off your face quite frequently? When they showed him on it he'd already said he'd be happy to clear things up with the police and they've got him on bail pending enquiries because he co-operated. They've also arrested Gary Glitter - has anyone been making allegations about him recently in the press? No. He's been interviewed (not arrested) because Savile's on record as sticking up for him when he was found out several years ago. Do we know what's happening with him yet? No and the same with Starr for now.

If and when either of them are charged in relation to the Savile revelations then yes, apologies for not believing allegations that shouldn't have been made public knowledge so prematurely. That's knowledge after the fact and not anticipating it which is what some people, however understandable that might be, seem to think has to be automatically inferred just because a whistle, however tragic, is blown without thought for how it might jeopardise a fair enquiry (because, I repeat, this is going to be a nightmare for the CPS to follow up if there are grounds to pursue a one off allegation after all this time).

Dotsie wrote:BTW, to everyone who thinks that one incident of groping a minor doesn't make him a paedophile, would it if she was 6, rather than 14? Is it her age that makes you think she's probably lying, or him not a paedophile? It seems that some people think that even if he did do it, it wasn't that big a deal anyway!

One incident does make him a paedophile - if it's proved. Her age at the time is immaterial - such an act is criminal and vile and if it took place should be punished. How much more clear do you need it? If it's proven that the act took place then Starr deserves everything thrown at him. As for groping not being a big deal - if she was raped that would be bigger wouldn't it? It's only a question of scale on the illegal. Until he's charged and sent for trial I'm more concerned about people who are only potentially involved getting dragged down in public ahead of proper investigation because the nation wants blood and the main pervert is beyond reach. That smacks of witch-hunt, especially if it turns out that Starr, trial or no trial, has nothing to answer for doesn't it?

Her age now could be material if her judgment sends her to the papers instead of the police who are manifestly now taking every allegation remotely centred around the sleaze-bag very seriously indeed - why do that after waiting all this time? Maybe Batty and I are too cynical about her - that's entirely possible, but this situation is being massaged for all it's worth by the press and not dealt with procedurally by the police whose job it is to make sure people who are like Savile go down. I'd rather leave it to the plods to come up with the goods than the tabloids thanks before I jump on this particular bandwagon. :|
"Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that never were and ask why not.” George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Jan Van Quirm
Member
 
Posts: 10635
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: Dunheved, Kernow

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Dotsie » Sun Nov 04, 2012 10:31 pm

It seems like you can't agree with things you've already said Jan, which makes this a difficult conversation to continue any further. If there's no more evidence to bring against this man, he won't be prosecuted anyway, so it doesn't really matter.
What's up with this glass? Excuse me? Excuse me? This is my glass? I don't think so. My glass was full! And it was a bigger glass!
User avatar
Dotsie
Member
 
Posts: 9426
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:07 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Quatermass » Sun Nov 04, 2012 10:47 pm

Okay, enough on British paedophiles, and onto someone, a British monarch, whose reputation used to be as bad. Unfortunately, his remains are in for a winter of discontent... :mrgreen: :lol:

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/OddSpot/2012/11/05/Battle_for_Kings_bones_812870.html?cid=ZBP_NEWS_L_L1_Battle_for_Kings_bones_051112
All you need to understand
Is everything you know is wrong!


-Weird Al Yankovic
User avatar
Quatermass
Member
 
Posts: 5684
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 3:58 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Batty » Sun Nov 04, 2012 10:47 pm

The reason I doubt this particular woman, is that she sold her story to the newspapers and appeared on a day-time television show before she even thought of speaking to the police.

IF Starr groped her whilst knowing she was under-age, then he deserves the book thrown at him. I'm just not prepared to pre-judge him.

I really don't want or mean to upset you, Dotsie, so I won't post again on this subject.
Going to my school was an education in itself. Which is not to be confused with actually getting an education (Schultz)
User avatar
Batty
Member
 
Posts: 4701
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:03 pm
Location: East Anglia

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Jan Van Quirm » Sun Nov 04, 2012 10:57 pm

Wow! Q's playing diplomat :shock: :lol:

Dotsie wrote:If there's no more evidence to bring against this man, he won't be prosecuted anyway, so it doesn't really matter.
That's all I'm saying Dotsie - if he's taken to trial I've no sympathy for him.

This discussion is based on opinions and essentially Batty and I were voicing doubts over some of the reports that are going around and because the ones against Starr didn't originate with the police. If you want to assign other interpretations or words onto what we've said then that's your preogative and, as you say, there's no point in getting into arguments over who said what. We can all agree that people who abuse children are beyond the pale and I'll shut up about it as well.
"Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that never were and ask why not.” George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Jan Van Quirm
Member
 
Posts: 10635
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: Dunheved, Kernow

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Quatermass » Sun Nov 04, 2012 11:09 pm

Jan Van Quirm wrote:Wow! Q's playing diplomat :shock: :lol:


Why so surprised? I used to be a moderator on another BBS.

However, I am also getting PO'ed by this little saga. Can we at least leave aside the Jimmy Savile saga and its associated splash damage for at least, I dunno, a day or so? Allow tempers to cool a little? Just because you're (and by that, I mean all of us in the thread) entitled to an opinion doesn't mean that we are all entitled to it as well (with apologies to Paul Darrow and Terry Nation), and tempers are getting heated. Including my own. And we all know how well that ended for all concerned, including myself.
All you need to understand
Is everything you know is wrong!


-Weird Al Yankovic
User avatar
Quatermass
Member
 
Posts: 5684
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 3:58 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Sister Jennifer » Sun Nov 04, 2012 11:17 pm

Prince Charles & Camilla are visiting the town I grew up in today...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nation ... 6510427262
Undead yes -
Unperson no!
User avatar
Sister Jennifer
Member
 
Posts: 2697
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 12:08 am
Location: Australia

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Quatermass » Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:08 am

More pointless Aussie political crap...

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/TopStories/2012/11/05/Treasury_used_as_political_tool_-_Oppn_813170.html?cid=ZBP_NEWS_L_L1-3_TreasuryusedaspoliticaltoolOppn_RSS_051112

The thing that makes me speechless, the thing that gets my goat, is that the very things the Opposition are whinging and bitching about are the very things they would do in office. :x
All you need to understand
Is everything you know is wrong!


-Weird Al Yankovic
User avatar
Quatermass
Member
 
Posts: 5684
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 3:58 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Catch-up » Mon Nov 05, 2012 11:14 am

Not quite speechless, but a little more startling than I was expecting:

http://www.grindtv.com/outdoor/blog/39929/hikers+take+flight+when+what+they+thought+was+a+bear+resembles+bigfoot/

And, Dotsie, I appreciate your posts! :D Q, don't think anyone's temper was getting out of control, but I appreciate the thought. So, :D for you too.
“It is the peculiar nature of the world to go on spinning no matter what sort of heartbreak is happening.”
― Sue Monk Kidd, The Secret Life of Bees:
User avatar
Catch-up
Member
 
Posts: 7034
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:19 am
Location: Michigan, U.S.A.

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Dotsie » Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:00 pm

It's always nice to be appreciated :D I'm not losing my temper, but if Q thinks I am then I'll step off ;)

And in keeping with my reputation for being a cynic, that thing was a man in dark clothes taking a "comfort break" :P
What's up with this glass? Excuse me? Excuse me? This is my glass? I don't think so. My glass was full! And it was a bigger glass!
User avatar
Dotsie
Member
 
Posts: 9426
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:07 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby Quatermass » Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:10 pm

Dotsie wrote:It's always nice to be appreciated :D I'm not losing my temper, but if Q thinks I am then I'll step off ;)


It was more the discussion was getting heated, and tempers were going to be inevitably lost, sooner or later, this side of madness or the other. :| Hell, for all I know, I would have lost my temper first.
All you need to understand
Is everything you know is wrong!


-Weird Al Yankovic
User avatar
Quatermass
Member
 
Posts: 5684
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 3:58 am

Re: File this under "Headlines that left you speechless"

Postby ChristianBecker » Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:43 pm

Quatermass wrote:More pointless Aussie political crap...

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/TopStories/2012/11/05/Treasury_used_as_political_tool_-_Oppn_813170.html?cid=ZBP_NEWS_L_L1-3_TreasuryusedaspoliticaltoolOppn_RSS_051112

The thing that makes me speechless, the thing that gets my goat, is that the very things the Opposition are whinging and bitching about are the very things they would do in office. :x

Welcome to politics.
On with their heads! I'm the clown prince of fools
if you don't get the joke it's your loss
Love and laughter you see are the new currency
'cause greed's coinage is not worth a toss

Exile yourself to the unforgiving continent of Wraeclast!
User avatar
ChristianBecker
Member
 
Posts: 4191
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 7:21 pm
Location: Bingen

PreviousNext

Return to The Broken Drum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], The Mad Collector and 7 guests