OT - Rolf Harris.

Well, perhaps not the most surprising verdict ever.

A light that shone brightly in at least two nations thoroughly extinguished for ever.

I have a niggling reservation. Before I state what that is, and just for the record, obviously all forms of sexual abuse, bullying etc etc are reprehensible and have no place in the modern world.

That's where my teeny hesitation comes in. 'Modern'.

Have a listen to this brave lady who waved her right to anonymity. At 48 seconds she states 'A lot of older, middle aged men would have a go. It was not that unusual.'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-28156387

Now, if 'a lot' of men were having a go, and if the Courts have deemed that past behaviour is punishable by today's standards, then why are the other men who 'had a go' not being brought to book?

I feel certain there are many women in the acquaintance circles of posters on here and maybe even our resident regular female poster who could give evidence to all sorts of unacceptable behaviour in years gone by (hopefully not as perpetrators!).

So, why Rolf? Obviously because of his celebrity. It seems that those who were / are famous are being brought to book whilst those who behaved in very similar, possibly even worse, ways are getting off without attention.

The counter argument is that with celebrity comes a responsibility to adhere to high standards. I get that completely.

It still leaves me with a slight hesitation that the justice system has gone for high profile, easy targets whilst there may be be worst offenders hidden by their anonymity.

What do you think?

 

They were famous, no one would believe the kids, the same goes for the Westminster politician ***** ring in the 70s and 80s. Even now clegg is saying it won't get investigated and the details will probably get "lost" somewhere.

Its just a shame he couldn't be sentenced by laws applicable when the incidents happened and not currents ones or he'd never get out again.

 

Chances are, at his age, he may not get out alive anyway. I am so pissed off that this sort of thing is occurring again and again to people that as I kid, me and my peer group looked up to. Were their whole lives based on lies?

 

Let's not lose perspective that there were many more good ones than bad ones. There is greatest disappointment when the public persona is not matched by the private one even if not in an illegal way. I'm sure we all have out personal list of people with feet of clay.

 

Someone will tell me Gary Glitter was up to no good soon.

 

His punishment was limited to what he would have received at the time the offences were committed - that's the law. They were crimes then and if he had been sentenced according to today's standards he would have got over ten years. These were not 'gropes' they were premeditated sexual assaults on children which involved planning, grooming etc.

On some things moral relativism makes me puke.

The Justice system is going for anybody where there is sufficient evidence to mount a prosecution.

 

The sentence of five years and nine months has already been referred to the Attorney General's Office under the "unduly lenient sentence scheme".
A spokeswoman for the Attorney General's Office did not say who had referred the sentence as being "unduly lenient" but said it "only takes one person to trigger the process".
The sentence must be considered within 28 days for possible referral to the Court of Appeal, the spokeswoman added.
Harris was prosecuted based on the law at the time of his offences, when the maximum sentence for indecent assault was two years in prison, or five years for victims under 13.

 

I think we need to get a perspective on his crimes. This wasn't a drunken grope at a Christmas party. The crimes were that of a serial offender who abused his celebrity status to provide himself the opportunity to do what he did.

 

Let's face it, we all know someone who was a serial 'groper' and who's antics were always laughed off as 'He's always done that' or 'that's just the way he is'. No-one will be pursuing those types, it's just the famous who by their fame probably tried it on all the more believing nothing could be done about it that are now being targeted.

The sentence he got probably is lighter than many expected but remember he'll be on the nonce's wing which won't be pleasant for an 84-year-old and he'll doubtless be sued left, right and centre...

 

No Sooper, I don't know anyone (at least not consciously) who sexually assaults children. Which is what these people are being convicted of. Do you?

 

I mean the office letch types, there's been one or two in virtually every job I've been in. I imagine it's not tolerated now but in years gone by these arseholes would get away with it endlessly.

And I'm not condoning it in any way, after all these types could well have been doing it to young girls as well. Harris has got his just desserts and he'll suffer inside that's for sure...

 

I have always liked Rolf
I feel quite sad about this
There is no comparison between him and someone like Saville who got away with it

 

Who said all news is bad. I wouldn't normally say such a thing but he is one sick fcuk! I hope he lives for many years .......... rotting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ome-computer-kept-note-diary-delete-them.html

 

does this mean I have to change my favourite song
2 little boys
no 1 the day I was born

 

Rolf might get 2 big boys now if he's lucky

 

will he know what it is yet

 

I suspect there are a few celebs (has beens) probably ****ting themselves right now. I wonder who will be next?

 

Would you like to spend 5 years inside as a convicted peado..?
lienient wont matter..after the first year it wont make much diffrence to Rolf...he will be raped at will from day 1...and i for one say GOOD.

Tie the Kangaroo Down (for) sport..eh rolph ?

 

Rolfs bum hole will be wider than the hole in his didgeridoo!

 

are british prisons really as bad as American ones