That's where me and you differ Billy ...... I'm excellent at biding my time and letting things die down. I wouldn't put myself in the frame and risk further upsetting my family. I've held grudges in the past for years and then hit the ****ers hard, when they weren't expecting it, and left no proof. Not for child abuse or owt, just people thinking they can use a position of power to get one over on me. You may be part of a big gang but one day that gang will break up and you're on your own. Or you may have the protection of the police but eventually they'll move on and you're stranded. Stuart Hall thought he'd got away with his **** for decades and now he's behind bars ..... ..... someone decided to take their revenge.
How did an 11/12 year old happen to be unacompannied in his presence in the first place? Where were the parents/ chaperones etc?
The family were friends oh the Harris's and were regular guests. I've had my kids sleep over with friends and vice versa .... ...... I'd be quite upset if one of the dads had rubbed them up and kissed them.
It's the only way for me mate. Your regular bannings, from here, tell me that you're a lash out and take the **** kind of fella
Maybe's i'm looking at this in a far to simplisitc way. She's say's he kissed her. He say's he didn't, how could any of this ever be proved? It's word against word, and there seems to be no evidence.
That appears to be trying to shift blame If a grown man abuses a young girl he know exactly what he is doing & needs to accept the consequences for his actions. Unfortunately there is no way of the victim being free of consequences on her life.
Well I'm not one for holding grudges. I can have an argument with anybody & then forget about it. But if there's something to sort out with a person, I'd rather do it ASAP & get it over with.
I'm not defending him, if he is guilty hang the ****er, hang them all. All i'm getting at, these people coming forwards decades later, so any kind of physical evidence has long gone. No witnesses, so it's word against word, how can a court act on that kind of evidence. No wonder some peole will take the law into their own hands.
He's not in court to defend himself against this particular person ........ she's only giving evidence and has sworn to tell the truth. There's no need for her or the prosecution to prove that she is telling the truth. He hasn't been charged with any offence relating to her.
I read that bit, was just using it as an example, about possible lack of evidence in cases like this, that seem to be popping up all to often. And not many ending in conviction.
That is why so many of the buggers get away with it In cases like this the more victims who come forward who can describe specific patterns of behaviour the more likelihood of a conviction. Most young victims don't tell anyone because of shame, humiliation, fear of not being believed or they have been threatened or indeed many other reasons
I've no idea of the actual figures but that's not the point imo. If a girl/woman goes to the police alleging assault/abuse the police have no option but to investigate. If two unconnected people make the same allegations then they have little option but to arrest the suspect and question him. If the CPS see enough evidence to justify court proceedings then it goes to court, simple as that. Statements by alleged victims can be considered proof if enough details are correct and are substantiated by other witnesses. If a few unconnected witnesses claim the suspect did A, B & C in a particular way using particular words that may be considered proof enough.
