|
Post by greenhoff74 on Jun 30, 2014 23:08:13 GMT
He was nearly another one with the lid nailed on before anything was done.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 30, 2014 23:32:50 GMT
This dickie bird "that's out" could become a famous trademark on the oatcake YES Ambassador, I am excited by its potential! Any RIP thread, any jailing, any transfers out from the club, all cup exits It's a shame you can't drop pictures in the chat room, it would be the perfect way to dispatch BLIP's from the chat room
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2014 23:41:39 GMT
This dickie bird "that's out" could become a famous trademark on the oatcake YES Ambassador, I am excited by its potential! Any RIP thread, any jailing, any transfers out from the club, all cup exits It's a shame you can't drop pictures in the chat room, it would be the perfect way to dispatch BLIP's from the chat room Huge potential Sir Godfrey, the possibilities are endless to apply Dickie to threads.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2014 4:12:41 GMT
Watching the Aussie news channel, there are loads of allegations being reported now, but had to be kept quiet whilst his trial in UK was taking place. In all of this, Max Cliiford, Stuart Hall, Now Rolf Harris, I can't help feeling " What a fucking shame the arch paedo cunt Saville was not caught and punished"
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2014 4:57:34 GMT
I just don't understand how all of this has been kept quiet for so long.
There are innocent people who must have known what was going on and turned a blind eye to it. Equally as bad in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 1, 2014 6:16:41 GMT
I'm sure many a thesis will be written by degree students in future about whether we can, or should, divorce art from the character of the artist. I don't know what I'd do if I had a Rolf Harris original. Obviously, I wouldn't have it on the wall in the sitting room at the moment. But, would I get rid of it (for virtually nothing) or destroy it? Or would I assume that, given time, it would rise in value - possibly after Harris's death - and leave it in my will in the hope that someone would benefit from it some day?
Like the rest of the celebrities convicted he sounds to have been a really persistent predator. I wonder if his fame and celebrity contributed to his flawed character? Obviously if he had been simply an office worker (or whatever) for his adult life, he would not have had the opportunities that his fame brought him. I assume he would still have been a sexual predator but on a smaller scale - but it is possible that he would never have stepped over the line in the first place.
Sad to find that so many of the entertainers and celebs we have grown up with have been such shits in real life.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2014 6:54:03 GMT
Jonathan king, Gary Glitter, now Rolf Harris. I can't play any of my record collection nowadays. I'm seriously wondering if John Peel will come under posthumous scrutiny? I can't remember where I heard it, but I think there have been some allegations, possibly unfounded and quite low key. It may be nothing. John Peel is a giant figure in the story of British pop culture and he is still held in the very highest regard to this day. His nightly radio show was a pillar of the British musical landscape for something like 30 years. It's how we learned about new bands as youngsters. Glastonbury even have a big stage named after him. I'd hate this one to be true as it would destroy his stellar reputation as a force for good. It would also taint the musical journeybook he gave to us all.
|
|
|
Post by Billybigbollox on Jul 1, 2014 7:10:30 GMT
Jonathan king, Gary Glitter, now Rolf Harris. I can't play any of my record collection nowadays. I'm seriously wondering if John Peel will come under posthumous scrutiny? I can't remember where I heard it, but I think there have been some allegations, possibly unfounded and quite low key. It may be nothing. John Peel is a giant figure in the story of British pop culture and he is still held in the very highest regard to this day. His nightly radio show was a pillar of the British musical landscape for something like 30 years. It's how we learned about new bands as youngsters. Glastonbury even have a big stage named after him. I'd hate this one to be true as it would destroy his stellar reputation as a force for good. It would also taint the musical journeybook he gave to us all. That's right he had a sexual relationship with a 15 year old girl. There wouldn't be much point in investigating that now though with him being dead I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by greenhoff74 on Jul 1, 2014 7:41:31 GMT
Tony Blackburn has spoken about it on Sky news papers review this morning, said he'd heard nothing about Rolf and had always seemed a nice guy when he met him, but he had heard rumours about Jimmy Saville but without seeing him do something wrong he couldn't accuse him of it, you need evidence.
He said he'd never liked Jimmy Saville " he always came across as an odd guy"
|
|
|
Post by britsabroad on Jul 1, 2014 8:01:38 GMT
I'm sure many a thesis will be written by degree students in future about whether we can, or should, divorce art from the character of the artist. I don't know what I'd do if I had a Rolf Harris original. Obviously, I wouldn't have it on the wall in the sitting room at the moment. But, would I get rid of it (for virtually nothing) or destroy it? Or would I assume that, given time, it would rise in value - possibly after Harris's death - and leave it in my will in the hope that someone would benefit from it some day? Like the rest of the celebrities convicted he sounds to have been a really persistent predator. I wonder if his fame and celebrity contributed to his flawed character? Obviously if he had been simply an office worker (or whatever) for his adult life, he would not have had the opportunities that his fame brought him. I assume he would still have been a sexual predator but on a smaller scale - but it is possible that he would never have stepped over the line in the first place. Sad to find that so many of the entertainers and celebs we have grown up with have been such shits in real life. I don't think it will have any effect at all once the furore passes. Van Gogh was a crazed drug addict known for attacking himself and others with sharp objects. Doesn't diminish the brilliance or value of his work. Not that Rolf Harris is anywhere close to the genius of Van Gogh.
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Jul 1, 2014 11:30:00 GMT
He used to do that stupid pant when he sang,any panting from now on will have nowt to do with singing. Whats the betting he ends up in some cushy open prison before Xmas?
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jul 1, 2014 11:51:37 GMT
i appreciate he has probably moved his millions but what is the point of putting him in prison at his age.
a fine of 99% of his fortune and let him be in the public eye as a disgrace
the real punishment for a guy his age and status is his reputation in tatters
prison will just cost us
he can go out his business with everybody knowing he is a dirty nonce or if he is too ashamed he becomes housebound
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Jul 1, 2014 12:17:19 GMT
I'm sure many a thesis will be written by degree students in future about whether we can, or should, divorce art from the character of the artist. I don't know what I'd do if I had a Rolf Harris original. Obviously, I wouldn't have it on the wall in the sitting room at the moment. But, would I get rid of it (for virtually nothing) or destroy it? Or would I assume that, given time, it would rise in value - possibly after Harris's death - and leave it in my will in the hope that someone would benefit from it some day? Like the rest of the celebrities convicted he sounds to have been a really persistent predator. I wonder if his fame and celebrity contributed to his flawed character? Obviously if he had been simply an office worker (or whatever) for his adult life, he would not have had the opportunities that his fame brought him. I assume he would still have been a sexual predator but on a smaller scale - but it is possible that he would never have stepped over the line in the first place. Sad to find that so many of the entertainers and celebs we have grown up with have been such shits in real life. It will be a dilemma for some. I wanted to buy a hitler original that came up for auction a few years back - he was a pretty mediocre artist so his pictures were relatively cheap. The wife vetoed having it in the house, somewhat short-sighted I thought - when it was a chance to own a signed item by the most influential man of the 20th century.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 1, 2014 12:38:31 GMT
I'm sure many a thesis will be written by degree students in future about whether we can, or should, divorce art from the character of the artist. I don't know what I'd do if I had a Rolf Harris original. Obviously, I wouldn't have it on the wall in the sitting room at the moment. But, would I get rid of it (for virtually nothing) or destroy it? Or would I assume that, given time, it would rise in value - possibly after Harris's death - and leave it in my will in the hope that someone would benefit from it some day? Like the rest of the celebrities convicted he sounds to have been a really persistent predator. I wonder if his fame and celebrity contributed to his flawed character? Obviously if he had been simply an office worker (or whatever) for his adult life, he would not have had the opportunities that his fame brought him. I assume he would still have been a sexual predator but on a smaller scale - but it is possible that he would never have stepped over the line in the first place. Sad to find that so many of the entertainers and celebs we have grown up with have been such shits in real life. It will be a dilemma for some. I wanted to buy a hitler original that came up for auction a few years back - he was a pretty mediocre artist so his pictures were relatively cheap. The wife vetoed having it in the house, somewhat short-sighted I thought - when it was a chance to own a signed item by the most influential man of the 20th century. I must say that the pictures I've seen by Hitler wouldn't be something I'd give houseroom to - and that isn't just because he was who he was - he was worse than mediocre as an artist to my mind. Rolf Harris, on the other hand, did have talent - I can understand the attraction of having one of his works and that would be true even if he had never been famous. I understand why people buy art (or wine!) as an investment but, personally, I'd only buy art to look at and wine to drink.
|
|
|
Post by greenhoff74 on Jul 1, 2014 14:44:28 GMT
i appreciate he has probably moved his millions but what is the point of putting him in prison at his age. a fine of 99% of his fortune and let him be in the public eye as a disgrace the real punishment for a guy his age and status is his reputation in tatters prison will just cost us he can go out his business with everybody knowing he is a dirty nonce or if he is too ashamed he becomes housebound If it's good enough for Ronnie Biggs at his age and state of health then it's good enough for Rolf.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jul 1, 2014 15:02:00 GMT
I'm sure many a thesis will be written by degree students in future about whether we can, or should, divorce art from the character of the artist. I don't know what I'd do if I had a Rolf Harris original. Obviously, I wouldn't have it on the wall in the sitting room at the moment. But, would I get rid of it (for virtually nothing) or destroy it? Or would I assume that, given time, it would rise in value - possibly after Harris's death - and leave it in my will in the hope that someone would benefit from it some day? Like the rest of the celebrities convicted he sounds to have been a really persistent predator. I wonder if his fame and celebrity contributed to his flawed character? Obviously if he had been simply an office worker (or whatever) for his adult life, he would not have had the opportunities that his fame brought him. I assume he would still have been a sexual predator but on a smaller scale - but it is possible that he would never have stepped over the line in the first place. Sad to find that so many of the entertainers and celebs we have grown up with have been such shits in real life. I don't think it will have any effect at all once the furore passes. Van Gogh was a crazed drug addict known for attacking himself and others with sharp objects. Doesn't diminish the brilliance or value of his work. Not that Rolf Harris is anywhere close to the genius of Van Gogh. And nor is a bit of recreational hashish and some self harming on a par with being a serial, predatory child abuser.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jul 1, 2014 15:02:31 GMT
i appreciate he has probably moved his millions but what is the point of putting him in prison at his age. a fine of 99% of his fortune and let him be in the public eye as a disgrace the real punishment for a guy his age and status is his reputation in tatters prison will just cost us he can go out his business with everybody knowing he is a dirty nonce or if he is too ashamed he becomes housebound If it's good enough for Ronnie Biggs at his age and state of health then it's good enough for Rolf. i do agree but his family get to keep the millions he made whilst being a dirty nonce im just throwing the argument that there are greater punishments than jail for a man his age
|
|
|
Post by localloser on Jul 1, 2014 18:25:39 GMT
If it's good enough for Ronnie Biggs at his age and state of health then it's good enough for Rolf. i do agree but his family get to keep the millions he made whilst being a dirty nonce im just throwing the argument that there are greater punishments than jail for a man his age Now he's been convicted I wonder if any of the victims will be able to claim compensation? I read somewhere that many of Savile's victims are claiming against his estate. Maybe some of his millions will go to those he has abused. Bastard. Also, the deal with prison is his loss of liberty. He tried to do the "entertainer" piece in court as well as sketching, until the judge slapped him down and confiscated all his drawings. For such an arrogant arsehole as Harris, the loss of liberty combined with the notorious dislike of sex offenders within the prison population will ensure he has a most unpleasant time. Hope so anyroad.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2014 22:54:23 GMT
He was invited into Broadmoor in 1973 by Jimmy Savile.
mumf
|
|
|
Post by maninasuitcase on Jul 1, 2014 23:50:24 GMT
I'm seriously wondering if John Peel will come under posthumous scrutiny? I can't remember where I heard it, but I think there have been some allegations, possibly unfounded and quite low key. It may be nothing. John Peel is a giant figure in the story of British pop culture and he is still held in the very highest regard to this day. His nightly radio show was a pillar of the British musical landscape for something like 30 years. It's how we learned about new bands as youngsters. Glastonbury even have a big stage named after him. I'd hate this one to be true as it would destroy his stellar reputation as a force for good. It would also taint the musical journeybook he gave to us all. That's right he had a sexual relationship with a 15 year old girl. There wouldn't be much point in investigating that now though with him being dead I suppose. if they digging up stuff on Leonard rossiter then they'll do it on any deceased star.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2014 2:43:23 GMT
A few thoughts (not excuses): * I think that there is something wrong - in the "He's Never Right" sense - with anyone who wants to "entertain people". Something about what is says about a person's basic mental state ... What they are like as people. Normal people aren't such attention seekers (as me mum would say); the "need to entertain" as many people on the telly seem to refer to it, is almost certainly not a healthy personality trait. * If almost anyone I have ever met spent 50+ years having smoke blown up their arse, for being ever so slightly above averagely talented; had been honoured by the Queen, have met almost every Prime Minster in the Commonwealth, have plaques, statues, paving stones and lord knows what else put up back in your home country - Then, after 50 years of it, almost everyone I have ever met would be a complete and utter wanker with no sense of right or wrong and a massively over inflated sense of their own importance (I am sure I would). * The very recent Aussie allegations are not from kids - or from women who were kids when they were assaulted (as far as I can tell) - They appear to be from the early 2000s; when Harris would have been in his mid-70s. Some old perv, touching up a mature woman - while rightly likely to get you slapped and some time before a magistrate - is a world away from fiddling with kiddies. Conflating the two is helping no one (bar the media sell stories) * The 1970s - Have a lot to answer for. When you think back (if you are old enough ... and on this board, who isn't?! ) much of what was going on (real life and media) was a bit less than "OK", even by the supposed standards of the day. I will forever trot out the following, when someone tells me there wasn't something seriously wrong - especially in the media, but in wider society too - in the 1970s. In 1979 ABBA[ not really known for their controversial lyrics nor overly hedonistic lifestyles, released a chart topping song entitled, Does Your Mother Know? about a 16 year old girl wanting to fk the two upstanding male members of the group (bad pun very much intended) ... To be fair, ABBA escaped with their modesty intact. Still ... not the kind of song you'd see top the charts today, is it? And if you want to know where all the perverts of the 1970s came from? In 1959 Sam Cooke released Only 16And I could go on and on and on and on ... Society (popular culture) is responsible for creating an atmosphere that worships youth and innocence - probably because it is the one thing no one can permanently keep hold of? - sadly, some individuals within society are unable to separate the fantasy of that, from reality. Such folk must be locked up, but the entities within society who peddle idea that only youth equates to beauty, should take a little look at themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2014 10:38:34 GMT
A few thoughts (not excuses): * I think that there is something wrong - in the "He's Never Right" sense - with anyone who wants to "entertain people". Something about what is says about a person's basic mental state ... What they are like as people. Normal people aren't such attention seekers (as me mum would say); the "need to entertain" as many people on the telly seem to refer to it, is almost certainly not a healthy personality trait. * If almost anyone I have ever met spent 50+ years having smoke blown up their arse, for being ever so slightly above averagely talented; had been honoured by the Queen, have met almost every Prime Minster in the Commonwealth, have plaques, statues, paving stones and lord knows what else put up back in your home country - Then, after 50 years of it, almost everyone I have ever met would be a complete and utter wanker with no sense of right or wrong and a massively over inflated sense of their own importance (I am sure I would). * The very recent Aussie allegations are not from kids - or from women who were kids when they were assaulted (as far as I can tell) - They appear to be from the early 2000s; when Harris would have been in his mid-70s. Some old perv, touching up a mature woman - while rightly likely to get you slapped and some time before a magistrate - is a world away from fiddling with kiddies. Conflating the two is helping no one (bar the media sell stories) * The 1970s - Have a lot to answer for. When you think back (if you are old enough ... and on this board, who isn't?! ) much of what was going on (real life and media) was a bit less than "OK", even by the supposed standards of the day. I will forever trot out the following, when someone tells me there wasn't something seriously wrong - especially in the media, but in wider society too - in the 1970s. In 1979 ABBA[ not really known for their controversial lyrics nor overly hedonistic lifestyles, released a chart topping song entitled, Does Your Mother Know? about a 16 year old girl wanting to fk the two upstanding male members of the group (bad pun very much intended) ... To be fair, ABBA escaped with their modesty intact. Still ... not the kind of song you'd see top the charts today, is it? And if you want to know where all the perverts of the 1970s came from? In 1959 Sam Cooke released Only 16And I could go on and on and on and on ... Society (popular culture) is responsible for creating an atmosphere that worships youth and innocence - probably because it is the one thing no one can permanently keep hold of? - sadly, some individuals within society are unable to separate the fantasy of that, from reality. Such folk must be locked up, but the entities within society who peddle idea that only youth equates to beauty, should take a little look at themselves. strange you condemn the Aussie press for "Conflating" 2 different situations re: ages, yet go on to use an Abba song referencing a woman who is legally old enough to have sex and actively consents to any kind of liaison and a Sam Cooke song that is about a time when both HE and the girl were 16 and doesn't even mention anything remotely sexual rather it's a song about two young teenagers and how simple love is.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2014 12:53:10 GMT
Sick paedo, if I found out some sick twat had done anything to my kids, it would take every single member of the boothen end to stop me killing the bastard, Jail is to light a punishment I'm not sure too many of the boothen would want to stop you anyway
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2014 13:20:14 GMT
strange you condemn the Aussie press for "Conflating" 2 different situations re: ages, yet go on to use an Abba song referencing a woman who is legally old enough to have sex and actively consents to any kind of liaison and a Sam Cooke song that is about a time when both HE and the girl were 16 and doesn't even mention anything remotely sexual rather it's a song about two young teenagers and how simple love is. Is it, Millsy? I didn't think so. Lazy maybe, but not really strange. I could have used better examples, but to be honest the 70s was so damn odd, when you look back at the music and the TV (and the films, but maybe a bit less so), that I could be here all night. Not just the "young woman" thing - which was definitely a bit of a thing of the time - but the amount of violence and abuse toward women, the sexist stuff across the media and society in general. Men were still expected to be smacking their wives about, when the Sweeney was on TV the first time around. I'm not excusing Harris, Millsy - sick f**k should have gone for help - But it's no wonder some people who were at the top of that tree turned out to be wacko, when you look at a lot of the prevailing attitudes of the day. I also think, when you read about the amount of online sh1t that they turn up, and the number of people caught up in that ... 4 or 5 famous faces is still probably too few, given how many famous faces there have been in the last 50+ years of TV
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2014 14:55:04 GMT
strange you condemn the Aussie press for "Conflating" 2 different situations re: ages, yet go on to use an Abba song referencing a woman who is legally old enough to have sex and actively consents to any kind of liaison and a Sam Cooke song that is about a time when both HE and the girl were 16 and doesn't even mention anything remotely sexual rather it's a song about two young teenagers and how simple love is. Is it, Millsy? I didn't think so. Lazy maybe, but not really strange. I could have used better examples, but to be honest the 70s was so damn odd, when you look back at the music and the TV (and the films, but maybe a bit less so), that I could be here all night. Not just the "young woman" thing - which was definitely a bit of a thing of the time - but the amount of violence and abuse toward women, the sexist stuff across the media and society in general. Men were still expected to be smacking their wives about, when the Sweeney was on TV the first time around. I'm not excusing Harris, Millsy - sick f**k should have gone for help - But it's no wonder some people who were at the top of that tree turned out to be wacko, when you look at a lot of the prevailing attitudes of the day. I also think, when you read about the amount of online sh1t that they turn up, and the number of people caught up in that ... 4 or 5 famous faces is still probably too few, given how many famous faces there have been in the last 50+ years of TV oh yeah completely agree with all that mate, just think using one song about consentual sex between people above the legal age limit and one song about 2 teenagers weren't the greatest examples to back up your point...wasn't disagreeing with the points made however, as you say the 70s were a completely different age and people saw far more as "Acceptable behaviour" back then. i agree that i think these recent high profile cases could be just the tip of the iceberg and i for one have no issues with going back and retrosepctively righting those wrongdoings now. just because society may not have viewed these things back then the way they do now is no excuse, it was ilegal then and still is now so a retro cleanup of the way society viewed things is perfectly fine as far as i'm concerned. the more of the sick bastards we catch now who for years thought they'd got away with it, the better as far i'm concerned!
|
|
|
Post by NassauDave on Jul 3, 2014 3:37:43 GMT
The judge, at the sentencing hearing, holding his hands over his papers says" can you tell what it is yet?".....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2014 23:40:43 GMT
He's up for sentencing in the morning. Some suggest 10 years . A small price to pay for the decades of pain he has caused to scores of young innocent lives. I don't feel sorry for him even though I liked his public image like many others did. He won't last long inside.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Jul 4, 2014 8:45:23 GMT
hes a dirty indecent assaulting cunt these cases have mileage in them and there will be a lot more i can see a massive hillsborough/leveson type inquest coming for the bbc In 2012 as part of Operation Yewtree..Harris became a suspect but his Legal Team took out an Injunction preventing the BBC from naming him. This happened again in 2013. The problem with naming people without the right evidence is that it opens up an organisation to compensation claims and could compromise any future investigations. Lord McAlpine was very quick to take Legal Action because the evidence presented wasn't admissible in court.. Harris is a very wealthy man..his portraits are valued at £10,000 to £100,000 and he has hundreds..plus all the royalties from the records he's made over 60 years etc so he can afford the best possible Legal Team..the primary reason his name stayed out of the frame for so long.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2014 9:05:46 GMT
The latest celebs to be investigated are the Chuckle Brothers...It is called Operation to Me to Yewtree.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2014 9:15:48 GMT
Yew Trees are historically linked with Churches and Churchyards. Vicars and priests are linked with Churches and Churchyards. Vicars and Priests are also linked with ....''Operation Yewtree''
Bingo.!
|
|