Jump to content

So Farewell William Roache!


Guest somner9
 Share

Recommended Posts

thought you had him on ignore? Sorry, how silly of me. that would have been the dangerous path of taking you at your word

and the section in bold, you have evidence of this? Have you made a study and compiled evidence ?(you know, like they do in a court)

or are you just another puffed-up opinion-monger looking to portray their warped view as common sense?

You don't seem very good at reading dates or telling the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


possibly, but you seem pretty good at avoiding questions

Right, let's get this done with. At least you had the honesty to admit you were wrong about whether I ignore somner9.

Look up the CPS Policy For Prosecution Of Rape Cases. I refer you to the section on evidence where it states quite categorically :- Rape normally takes place in a private setting where the victim is the only witness. Think about it for a minute and possibly it will sink in. Witnesses and even evidence have always been a big problem in rape cases. DNA has changed all that and thankfully more of the despicable low-lives who commit this hellish crime are being caught. Not enough, but more.

William Roache has been charged with a rape going back 46 years. DNA evidence wasn't around then and in fact in this case it would have been immaterial because it seems nothing was reported at the time. We won't know until it comes to court if it gets that far.

Where's my warped view? We were discussing anonymity, not rape as such. Some posters have decided Roache is guilty already. Barristers acting for Roache can probably ask already if he can expect a fair trial. Potential jurors will be asked if they have read any of the publicity. How could they not have?

If Roache is found guilty, then I will say the same about him as I did about Stuart Hall. May he rot in hell. But I'm not going to pre-judge him. Let the courts decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that a bit late late in the day I have to agree with the many posters over the last year or two who called you a thicko. You only read into posts what you want to and you seem unable to understand the English language. Let's just leave it that I believe everyone is entitled to a fair trial and you don't. I see from a survey that around 76% of those responding agreed that in these kinds of cases anonymity until found guilty is reasonable. You're in the minority there but that's nothing new to you.

I will try for the last time to get something through your thick skull. I hope Stuart Hall rots in hell. He is a despicable apology for a human being. He was still entitled to a fair trial but at least he dug up a little common decency and pled guilty. That's not an argument for mitigation. He can still rot in hell.

You won't hear from me again. On ignore you'll be pleased to hear.

stuart hall - common decency lol.gif plea bargaining more likely, or is it decent of a molester to admit guilt ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope and I really don't see how you infer that.

i can see how he infers that, basically you said people over 16 have to be responsible for their own actions because they are over the age of consent, which does not seem to be the words of a sane person given that we are discussing a subject that infers people have been abused - which usually means they did not consent to it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

stuart hall - common decency lol.gif plea bargaining more likely, or is it decent of a molester to admit guilt ?

Yes it is decent to admit it. These cases are rarer than hens' teeth. They save the victims having to undergo possibly horrendous questioning from the defence counsel. Live in the real world. I'm not saying it is right or moral but it is sure as hell what happens. If everyone who is accused of rape is unquestionably guilty, then you have a point. Find them all guilty without trial. That's fair, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think a lot of raw nerves have been struck in this thread, if i were one of those racked with guilt i would worry as well, thankfully i'm not

I think you're right. I'm certainly not racked with guilt. I get the feeling you you think that everyone accused of rape is guilty. Do you? No one ever cried wolf?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're right. I'm certainly not racked with guilt. I get the feeling you you think that everyone accused of rape is guilty. Do you? No one ever cried wolf?

of course i don't think that everyone accused is guilty, i also don't think an abuser who admits guilt is being decent in admitting it because i tend to think that they know it can possibly get them a lighter sentence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

It is with great sadness I still have to look on my fellow man...

The Stuart Hall case is being seen as a watershed as starting with one person racked with guilt, shame, loathing, suicidal tendencies. so many women who knew nothing of each other found the strength to say... "He did that to me as well"... and still people think he should remain anonymous... What world do we want for our children?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to infer that people are coming forward with allegations purely to line their pockets marks you out as having the moral fibre of a bag of sick. i'd doubt that you have any evidence to back up that statement other than opinion. it's a sad reflection of our society that people see fit to portray opinion as fact.

you seem to be a person who thinks the problem with civil rights is that other people exercise them

the rest of your post makes no sense, marking you out as a moron

Morality of the sick bag , call it what you like, sometimes the reality of life is as we see day in day out , indeed just a bag sick. You cannot deny it , sad , but true, ask most folk in any walk of life, they'll have a tale or two.

Oops, you are not a cave dweller with no neighbours , right , just checking , no offence....no Ivory Tower ?

I have no doubt whatsoever that in some cases self interest and a few coin is most certainly the motivation, that is unquestionable ...................pop down to court most days you'll see / hear some seriously morally corrupt and financially motivated shenanigans and the what's in it for me mindset most certainly plays a part. I am not saying for one minute all cases of this distasteful nature are all about the lucre, but I'll bet you ( heh heh ) a lot are. Equally there are surely horrendous tales of abuse and innocence lost , that too is undeniable and the tragedy is it will continue, always has and always will. I hope that's not too uncomfortable an observation for you.

Surely you are not so naive or aherm ' moronic' as you so poetically put it, to dismiss my expressed opinion as irrelevant , surely you have more about you than to fail to realise that these cases are a minefield and that there are occasions as has been seen with Yewtree currently that there is a bandwagon effect. This is ironically created in no small way by the people engaged in exercising everyone's rights under law. I'm sure you understand that...................

Ok , so according to you I'm just a sicko, I have no moral fibre, I'm a rotten member of society because I express a contrary or objectionable opinion to you, well, thanks. If only I could be as righteous and good as you then........must be great. You know there is a name for the kind of intolerance you expressed to me on my legitimate view / and or of the views of others.................go figure ohmy.png

Anyway , all cases on their merits , for sure civil rights and all that, undeniable and absolutely, so what's the problem. I'm only expressing my opinion, it is after all as you so nicely put it , my moronic civil right to do so after all.

Jist sayin like flowers.gif .................night night , don't let the bed bugs bite ..........and that is not a euphemism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

Morality of the sick bag , call it what you like, sometimes the reality of life is as we see day in day out , indeed just a bag sick. You cannot deny it , sad , but true, ask most folk in any walk of life, they'll have a tale or two.

Oops, you are not a cave dweller with no neighbours , right , just checking , no offence....no Ivory Tower ?

I have no doubt whatsoever that in some cases self interest and a few coin is most certainly the motivation, that is unquestionable ...................pop down to court most days you'll see / hear some seriously morally corrupt and financially motivated shenanigans and the what's in it for me mindset most certainly plays a part. I am not saying for one minute all cases of this distasteful nature are all about the lucre, but I'll bet you ( heh heh ) a lot are. Equally there are surely horrendous tales of abuse and innocence lost , that too is undeniable and the tragedy is it will continue, always has and always will. I hope that's not too uncomfortable an observation for you.

Surely you are not so naive or aherm ' moronic' as you so poetically put it, to dismiss my expressed opinion as irrelevant , surely you have more about you than to fail to realise that these cases are a minefield and that there are occasions as has been seen with Yewtree currently that there is a bandwagon effect. This is ironically created in no small way by the people engaged in exercising everyone's rights under law. I'm sure you understand that...................

Ok , so according to you I'm just a sicko, I have no moral fibre, I'm a rotten member of society because I express a contrary or objectionable opinion to you, well, thanks. If only I could be as righteous and good as you then........must be great. You know there is a name for the kind of intolerance you expressed to me on my legitimate view / and or of the views of others.................go figure ohmy.png

Anyway , all cases on their merits , for sure civil rights and all that, undeniable and absolutely, so what's the problem. I'm only expressing my opinion, it is after all as you so nicely put it , my moronic civil right to do so after all.

Jist sayin like flowers.gif .................night night , don't let the bed bugs bite ..........and that is not a euphemism

Top Bloke!

Only thing is Stuart Hall got his kicks by sticking his hand up wee lassies skirts,,, sadly also it took them wee lassies 46 years to tell all of us what he was doing. Obviously others knew,,, but hey wer're all geezers eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, let's get this done with. At least you had the honesty to admit you were wrong about whether I ignore somner9.

Look up the CPS Policy For Prosecution Of Rape Cases. I refer you to the section on evidence where it states quite categorically :- Rape normally takes place in a private setting where the victim is the only witness. Think about it for a minute and possibly it will sink in. Witnesses and even evidence have always been a big problem in rape cases. DNA has changed all that and thankfully more of the despicable low-lives who commit this hellish crime are being caught. Not enough, but more.

William Roache has been charged with a rape going back 46 years. DNA evidence wasn't around then and in fact in this case it would have been immaterial because it seems nothing was reported at the time. We won't know until it comes to court if it gets that far.

Where's my warped view? We were discussing anonymity, not rape as such. Some posters have decided Roache is guilty already. Barristers acting for Roache can probably ask already if he can expect a fair trial. Potential jurors will be asked if they have read any of the publicity. How could they not have?

If Roache is found guilty, then I will say the same about him as I did about Stuart Hall. May he rot in hell. But I'm not going to pre-judge him. Let the courts decide.

You quoted a percentage, how did you arrive at that? Does your scrutiny of case notes back up the notion (I'll be generous and call it a notion) that the only evidence in historic cases is the statement of the complainant and the accused? perhaps there are other sources of evidence that place 2 people in the same place at the same time, confirm the ages of people, statements of 3rd parties who may have witnessed certain things immediately before or after the alleged attack, description of distinguishing marks not normally visible, medical examinations that might suggest violence. Maybe these are offered in a host of cases, including the recent high-profile ones.

to suggest that this is all one person's word against another is warped, a distortion of the facts, as is the suggestion that the bulk of these recent high-profile cases are motivated by money. some of these people may have been very seriously wronged and are only just finding a voice. better we should listen, no matter how uncomfortable that might be, before making knee-jerk judgements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You quoted a percentage, how did you arrive at that? Does your scrutiny of case notes back up the notion (I'll be generous and call it a notion) that the only evidence in historic cases is the statement of the complainant and the accused? perhaps there are other sources of evidence that place 2 people in the same place at the same time, confirm the ages of people, statements of 3rd parties who may have witnessed certain things immediately before or after the alleged attack, description of distinguishing marks not normally visible, medical examinations that might suggest violence. Maybe these are offered in a host of cases, including the recent high-profile ones.

to suggest that this is all one person's word against another is warped, a distortion of the facts, as is the suggestion that the bulk of these recent high-profile cases are motivated by money. some of these people may have been very seriously wronged and are only just finding a voice. better we should listen, no matter how uncomfortable that might be, before making knee-jerk judgements.

I don't know why I said 99%. I should probably have said 100%. I don't want to ask questions about anyone's sex life but sexual intercourse normally takes place when the couple are alone. OK, we've all heard of gang bangs and unfortunately there are cases where several men rape the same girl in the space of just a few minutes, bastards that they are. I never said that there is no evidence connected with a rape but if Roache goes to trial I'm willing to bet there will be no evidence from an alleged rape that was unreported for 46 years.

You wrote- 'To say that this is all one person's word against another is warped, a distortion of the facts.' How do you know? Have you got insider information? Apart from the virtually never a witness fact, which I stand by, I think you're overlooking too the fact that in many rape cases the fact that sexual intercourse took place is not denied. It comes down to whether or not it was consensual . So yes, in many cases it does boil down to one person's word against another's.

Look, what I've said about witnesses and consent isn't contentious. Those matters have plagued rape cases and caused the legal profession headaches for donkey's years. I have a friend, retired now, who was a partner in one of the biggest players in Glasgow in the legal aid side and he was required to defend guys on many occasions who were accused of rape. Sometimes he knew bloody rightly they were guilty, sometimes he was convinced they were innocent but as often as not he didn't have a baldy. They are very, very difficult cases.

In yesterday's Daily Mail, Peter McKay published a piece under the heading 'Hall's haul'. If I knew how to post it I would do so. Maybe someone else can. Until the Saville business broke and it became apparent that his estate could be pursued, this was never heard of. There is a compensation culture in the UK.

I won't respond to anything else you say to me about this matter. I'm not defending or implying mitigation for rapists. I'm defending the right to a fair trial. The courts will have to make a stance on this publicity business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why I said 99%. I should probably have said 100%. I don't want to ask questions about anyone's sex life but sexual intercourse normally takes place when the couple are alone. OK, we've all heard of gang bangs and unfortunately there are cases where several men rape the same girl in the space of just a few minutes, bastards that they are. I never said that there is no evidence connected with a rape but if Roache goes to trial I'm willing to bet there will be no evidence from an alleged rape that was unreported for 46 years.

You wrote- 'To say that this is all one person's word against another is warped, a distortion of the facts.' How do you know? Have you got insider information? Apart from the virtually never a witness fact, which I stand by, I think you're overlooking too the fact that in many rape cases the fact that sexual intercourse took place is not denied. It comes down to whether or not it was consensual . So yes, in many cases it does boil down to one person's word against another's.

Look, what I've said about witnesses and consent isn't contentious. Those matters have plagued rape cases and caused the legal profession headaches for donkey's years. I have a friend, retired now, who was a partner in one of the biggest players in Glasgow in the legal aid side and he was required to defend guys on many occasions who were accused of rape. Sometimes he knew bloody rightly they were guilty, sometimes he was convinced they were innocent but as often as not he didn't have a baldy. They are very, very difficult cases.

In yesterday's Daily Mail, Peter McKay published a piece under the heading 'Hall's haul'. If I knew how to post it I would do so. Maybe someone else can. Until the Saville business broke and it became apparent that his estate could be pursued, this was never heard of. There is a compensation culture in the UK.

I won't respond to anything else you say to me about this matter. I'm not defending or implying mitigation for rapists. I'm defending the right to a fair trial. The courts will have to make a stance on this publicity business.

Daily Mail reader-that explains everything. if you'd told me that in the first place i wouldnt have wasted any time on it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

Daily Mail reader-that explains everything. if you'd told me that in the first place i wouldnt have wasted any time on it

That made me damn near pish myself laughinglol.giflol.giflol.gif

We'll be getting the "That Nigel Farage bloke seems to have a point" story soon as wellthumbup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

I read Littlejohn in the Daily Mail this morning Somner.

He more or less agrees with you regarding the naming of suspects.

I can see both your points now.

I never thought i'd see the day that Littlejohn had my back1eye.gif Maybe I'll go out for a pint tonight with Nigel Farage and Clarkson!

Although Clarkson being a BBC stalwart would probably slip me some rohypnol and pass me round The Hamster and the Skinny dreepy wan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no getting away from it there was and probabaly still is a culture where men are "expected" to behave in a predatory maner towards young girls and certainly there is a bit of hypocracy when you're curning out stuff like St Trinians or please sir or Kiddie Pops or James Bond or any other of the sexist and mysogenist crap. I question if its actually any better today. I'm sure several sun girls will be less than 16 some one may not have stuck their hands up thier skirts but some one did suggest to them that it was ok to flash their boobs for money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest somner9

There is no getting away from it there was and probabaly still is a culture where men are "expected" to behave in a predatory maner towards young girls and certainly there is a bit of hypocracy when you're curning out stuff like St Trinians or please sir or Kiddie Pops or James Bond or any other of the sexist and mysogenist crap. I question if its actually any better today. I'm sure several sun girls will be less than 16 some one may not have stuck their hands up thier skirts but some one did suggest to them that it was ok to flash their boobs for money.

I flash mine for nowt!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daily Mail reader-that explains everything. if you'd told me that in the first place i wouldnt have wasted any time on it

The main paper I read is The Independent. It's the journalistic equivalent of joined up writing so you would definitely struggle with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why I said 99%. I should probably have said 100%. I don't want to ask questions about anyone's sex life but sexual intercourse normally takes place when the couple are alone. OK, we've all heard of gang bangs and unfortunately there are cases where several men rape the same girl in the space of just a few minutes, bastards that they are. I never said that there is no evidence connected with a rape but if Roache goes to trial I'm willing to bet there will be no evidence from an alleged rape that was unreported for 46 years.

You wrote- 'To say that this is all one person's word against another is warped, a distortion of the facts.' How do you know? Have you got insider information? Apart from the virtually never a witness fact, which I stand by, I think you're overlooking too the fact that in many rape cases the fact that sexual intercourse took place is not denied. It comes down to whether or not it was consensual . So yes, in many cases it does boil down to one person's word against another's.

Look, what I've said about witnesses and consent isn't contentious. Those matters have plagued rape cases and caused the legal profession headaches for donkey's years. I have a friend, retired now, who was a partner in one of the biggest players in Glasgow in the legal aid side and he was required to defend guys on many occasions who were accused of rape. Sometimes he knew bloody rightly they were guilty, sometimes he was convinced they were innocent but as often as not he didn't have a baldy. They are very, very difficult cases.

In yesterday's Daily Mail, Peter McKay published a piece under the heading 'Hall's haul'. If I knew how to post it I would do so. Maybe someone else can. Until the Saville business broke and it became apparent that his estate could be pursued, this was never heard of. There is a compensation culture in the UK.

I won't respond to anything else you say to me about this matter. I'm not defending or implying mitigation for rapists. I'm defending the right to a fair trial. The courts will have to make a stance on this publicity business.

Daily Mail reader-that explains everything. if you'd told me that in the first place i wouldnt have wasted any time on it

Oh you would have wasted your time as you and somner seem to be trying to be the Chuckle Brothers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...