[Closed] Oh Rolf 🙁

From what I've heard, the Krankies were very well known for their enjoyment of group activities...

stevewhyte - Member

Only to you, the rest of us got it and laughed.

Joke's on you, it was totally serious.

On a more serious note, I don't envy the courtroom artist.

Talk about pressure.

[img] [/img]
Couldn't resist sharing.

Depressing.

Guilty on 12 counts of sexual assault.

Let's hope they throw away the key.............

Abhorrent, opportunist paedo. I hope he perishes inside and never steps foot across his front door mat.

I bet there's a few con's savouring the thought of saying "can you giss what it is yit?" as they slip through his back gate.

"Rolf Harris used his wealth to get courts to prevent publication of his arrest for FIVE months"

one law for the rich.

"Rolf Harris used his wealth to get courts to prevent publication of his arrest for FIVE months"

one law for the rich.

Well, yeah, sort of. They were, iirc, reporting that "an 82 year old celebrity from <his town> has been held for further questioning" etc. so it wasn't the best kept secret ever.

And, not dissimilarly, there were the recent reports of a certain Vincent Tabbak's prosecution for whatever it was they found on his laptop "in the course of another investigation".

Preferable, imo, to be cautious about these things ahead of time rather than having a conviction overturned on appeal because a fair trial had been prejudiced due to inappropriate media coverage.

I guess although the wider implications for not naming people is that fewer victims come forwards (especially in cases like this where there were multiple victims)?

Some more detail;

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/19/rolf-harris-lawyers-leveson-suppress-arrest?CMP=twt_gu ]http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/19/rolf-harris-lawyers-leveson-suppress-arrest?CMP=twt_gu[/url]

I don't get all this "Rolf worship". He was a mediocre, barely talented paint splasher and TV "personality" who made a few poxy records.

Who cares? F*ck him. He's getting what he deserves.

[quote=Mr Woppit ]I don't get all this "Rolf worship". He was a mediocre, barely talented paint splasher and TV "personality" who made a few poxy records
Don't forget the Stylophone.

He deserves a custodial sentence just for that!

I'm not sure anyone's worshipping him?

He was a TV 'personality' in a time when there was relatively few of them about and a lot of people know him as a result.

I don't think anyone's saying he isn't getting what he's deserved.

Almost the opposite - that they feel betrayed by him for making them like him for his tv persona when they were children but he was also this other person in private.

Don't forget the Stylophone.

He deserves a custodial sentence just for that!

Too **** right! Thanks to that cacophonic piece of shit I now know how to play Good King Wenceslas.

Damn you, Rolf. Damn you to hell...

did someone mention Muppets? are they involved too?

they feel betrayed by him for making them like him

Oh please. Get a life. 🙄

[i]Get a life[/i]

[ahem]

[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/help-me-get-revenge ]http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/help-me-get-revenge[/url]

[/ahem]

I used the word 'they' deliberately. I'm disappointed but people form strange attachments to people they've never met - the whole Princess Di thing was it taken to it's illogical conclusion.

In the end it's the girls who were abused who've suffered and hopefully his punishment will mean they don't feel that his fame triumphed in keeping things hushed up.

barely talented paint splasher

I like his artwork actually and I don't think you can argue his talent when it comes to "Paint splashing".

That's not really the point here, though. An absolutely horrible man that will surely spend the rest of his days in prison

Wow, 12 counts! 😯

Sentencing?

Sun arise is still a cracking tune though.

He'll get prison in an easy jail.
He's famous and a paedophile so will be kept away from the "commoners" who would probably slash him within 5 seconds of meeting him. I'm not saying the slashing is a good thing but Rolf will stay in a nice room with a tv and be well fed.
How many homeless do you see who, through no fault of their own have nohwere?
Hopefully he will never feel freedom again for these crimes.

Very disappointing, burn him if it's true tho!!!

I don't get all this "Rolf worship". He was a mediocre, barely talented paint splasher and TV "personality" who made a few poxy records.

He was part of our childhoods, just like Stuart Hall and Jimmy Savile. Of course people have an attachment to that. I've said before that in a very small way, the conduct of these men is the theft of our innocence.

The curse of the extra leg

Gutted, anyone want some signed RH artwork?

He might not even get a custodial sentence, the judge is taking his poor health into consideration apparently.......... 👿

So lethal injection to ease his poor suffering.

Iolo I don't think we live in Texas, take your meds eh.

So if he stays home due to ill health how do you punish?
Stop his newspaper?

There is a difference between revenge and justice, I am not qualified to make the decision as to what his punishment will be and neither are you. The judge is (allegedly) and will sentence accordingly.

I'm sure he will. I do agree that the death sentence and I was probably out of order with that sentence.
I'm just aware that his life will not be too bad in prison or home or wherever he will be with plenty of family contact.
What will the victims get?

and at a party in a pub for the broadcaster Michael Parkinson, where a woman working at the bar said Harris kissed her neck.

I once had a female TV journalist give me a big kiss on the cheek having given her a ride in a car for the telethon. Should I file a complaint for sexual assault?

I've read the Guardian article through and find most of the evidence is lightweight. The most damning case hangs on how old his daughter's friend was when the consensual sex took place. Jailing him is a step to far unless that issue is clearly resolved IMO, so I hope for a suspended sentence.

Due to ill health?

Like the guards who murdered Jews.

Make it to 80 and you are immune from prosecution hey.

Found GUILTY on NINE counts.

12 counts according to the BBC

Edukator - Troll
Jailing him is a step to far unless that issue is clearly resolved IMO, so I hope for a suspended sentence.

I'm sure your feelings would be the same if he abused your daughter.

He's been found guilty, so has been prosecuted. It's now down to sentencing. I reckon all the protection society needs is a suspended sentence that tells the man "let your hands wander and you're going to jail direct".

A paedophile is a paedophile, don't care if he's on his about to die death bed he should be given the appropriate jail sentence that abusing his status to manipulate and attack his juvenile victims deserves. There is absolutely no excuse for defending this appalling individual. Those that state lack of fact or evidence, there was enough evidence for a jury to find him guilty on 12 counts......not one dodgy count, 12!!!!!!!!

I once had a female TV journalist give me a big kiss on the cheek having given her a ride in a car for the telethon. Should I file a complaint for sexual assault?

I reckon all the protection society needs is a suspended sentence that tells the man "let your hands wander and you're going to jail direct".

No wonder they added troll to your account.

Cut 'em off and serve them to him with a nice Chianti, or even better leave out the Chianti.

Anyone guilty of non-consensual sex and with a minor it's [u]always[/u] non-consensual should have the same treatment.

Anyone guilty of non-consensual sex and with a minor it's always non-consensual should have the same treatment.

Fair point but you do know that is not what he's been convicted, or even accused, of right?

I post from a country where the per capita prison population is about half that of the UK. One of the main reasons is that sentencing is more based on protecting society and rehabilitation than revenge and making an example.

I think that the court case itself, the verdict and the media coverage is already a significant punishment, and jail sentence both expensive and pointless. A suspended sentence seems a reasonable response unless you're into "an eye for an eye...".

A quick check reveals les but not half:

[url= http://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison-population-total?field_region_taxonomy_tid=14 ]Prison populations[/url]

Edit: don't forget to add England, Wales Scotland, NI Jersey etc before comparing.

dont forget to just compare sexual offences and say what % of people convicted of 12 offences get sent time ...you know compare like with like or make daft statements and then back them up with almost related points
Enough of this for me

Bets of luck getting a "debate"

Edukator, based on your reasonings I guess that the folk in your country like young kids to prey on then as it only attracts a suspended or rehabilitation sentence?

Well compare like with like then, Junkyard. In this case Rolf would have benefited from prescription laws in some other countries so there would'nt have been a case to answer. For example, if you made comments about what was under a girls jumper in France back in the seventies you can sleep on both your ears knowing nobody is going to arrest you for it.

What truly baffles me is how Harris's wife and daughter where there to support him throughout his trial. They would have heard the same evidence as the jury, and even if they didn't believe the evidence they must have surely have believed Harris when he freely admitted that he had a sexual relationship with his daughter's friend, claiming only that he waited until she was no longer a minor before he had sex with her.

So as far as his wife was concerned that would have made him unfaithful and adulterous, why would she want to stand by him ? And as far as his daughter was concerned that would have made him a pervert, again, why would she want to stand by him ?

I know that it's not unusual for women to be in denial over such matters but I just don't understand it.

[img] [/img]

On the issue of whether he was truly talented it's quite ridiculous imo to suggest that he wasn't, on the basis it would appear that he has been found guilty of pedophilia. Of course Harris was a highly talented entertainer, that's how he became wealthy, whether you personally liked his art, music, shows, etc, is irrelevant. Personally I thought 'two little boys' was utter shite.

You guess wrong, Suggsey. Attitudes are different but in a good way rather than a bad way.

Fair point but you do know that is not what he's been convicted, or even accused, of right?

I thought the law stated that a minor lacked the legal authority give their consent to sex, so that sex with a minor was always non-consensual? I could be wrong on that.

I'm intrigued by the Country you say has better attitudes towards offenders and their rehabilitation Edukator. As for the acceptance of what her husband and Bindi what her father has done is not a surprise, money motivates all sorts as does misguided loyalty...............

He didn't have sex with them. I don't think.

Fair enough Tom, I took the term 'sex attacks on girls' as meaning that he had. I freely admit knowing very little about the case as I tend to avoid reading news stories which involve unpleasant experiences/cruelty to children, and cruelty to animals. I'd rather not know the details.

Even if he had not had penetrative sexual contact with a child what he did was indecently assault them.......they were children.......my mind boggles at the thoughts that some folk may be having over the rights and wrongs of his convictions. 🙄

I thought the law stated that a minor lacked the legal authority give their consent to sex, so that sex with a minor was always non-consensual? I could be wrong on that.

No. There's no such concept of "statutory rape" as they have in the US. In England and Wales (not sure about Scotland), there's a difference between those under 16 and those under 13.

Even if he had not had penetrative sexual contact with a child what he did was indecently assault them.......they were children.......my mind boggles at the thoughts that some folk may be having over the rights and wrongs of his convictions.

Indecent assault isn't always what people think it is. It doesn't always mean the perpetrator has "touched someone inappropriately" - an unwanted slap on the bum could count.

As always, it's better to get a detailed understanding of the alleged facts and law. Something the media rarely bother with.

...the alleged facts

So what did the jury find him guilty of then, "an unwanted slap on the bum" or that he "touched someone inappropriately" which apparently is different.

EDIT : According to a CPS factsheet :

[i]Those accused of child rape can no longer argue that the child consented. Any sexual intercourse with a child under 13 will be treated as rape.[/i]

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 apparently.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/fact_sheets/sexual_offences/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/rolf-harris-found-guilty-on-all-12-counts-of-indecent-assault-9573593.html

My wife seemed upset, childhood hero and all that but couldn't actually tell me what he has done, does anyone know?

It's predominantly sexual assaults - groping for want of a better word - mostly on teenage girls, one charge related to a 7 or 8 year old. There was also the ubiquitous 'performed a sex act' which is more than groping, less than intercourse.

one charge related to a 7 or 8 year old

That puts it in a completely different category to 13-16, which is bad, very bad, but 7-8 is off the scale imo.

The charges are available on line along with the details thereof. He has been found gilty in a court by a jury and as such any doubt is now effectively eliminated. He needs a custodial sentence and that's an end to it.

Ernie - useful. The law has clearly been refined since I last looked at criminal stuff (at law school) 15 years ago.

ernie,

As the offences predated the 2003 Act he was tried for Indecent Assault under the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (it was repealed by the 2003 legislation, which replaced it) – not that it makes a huge difference, I don’t think.

It's not just the law that's changed, society has too. Judging people for what they did back then by today's standards is unfair. Words that were in common use back then are now totally unacceptable and would result in prosecution for racism. Remember the Benny Hill show, Dave Allen etc. It was a very different world.

Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13-year-old cousine in the 50s (whilst still married to his second wife). In Spain the age of consent was finally raised from 13 to 16 last year, the minimum age for marriage went from 14 to 16. Every "male" workplace one walked into in the seventies had the Pirelli calendar and the playboy centrefold on the wall, whilst the sixteen-year-old tea girl was the butt of sexist jokes. Or have those on here who were there conveniently forgotten?

Notions of what constitutes sexual assault, sexual harassment, consensual sex, pimping and many other crimes have changed. This was the "entertainment" of the day:

[url=

Hill[/url]

Edukator,

Judging people for what they did back then by today's standards is unfair

I can assure you that many victims of sexual assault do not consider the invasion into their being to be entertainment in any shape or form - no matter what age/era it was perpetrated in.

Racism was institutionalised in the early 60s, tolerated for another decade or so and eventually became both illegal and socially unacceptable. Should we prosecute everyone who called a black a ... in the 60s? My first toy was a Golliwog, a few years later I had the whole Robertson's jazz band - guilty as.

I'd get my face justifiably slapped if I danced a slow the same way today as we did in the 70s, times have changed. As for the way my girlfriend danced to Brass in Pocket, she'd get arrested for soliciting these days.

Calling someone a name, even a racist one, isn't really on a par with sexually assaulting children.

Edukator,

Your examples are totally out of context and wholly irrelevant.

Piteous, tasteless trolling or brazen ignorance, either way you won’t draw me in any further.

So, anyone heard anything about that paedophile ring involving MPs and other establishment figures recently?

Not since the last time you banged on about your conspiracy theories.

I'll save you the bother and post your favourite picture

[img] [/img]

Plus one to remind everyone that Prince Charles is also in on it.

[img] [/img]

If that isn't proof of an establishment paedophile ring then I don't know what is.

Edukator, one of his victims was 7.
And if you think the sexual assualt of children was acceptable or condoned in 60's Britain then you're deluding yourself.

You attempt to play down the seriousness of sexual assault on children every time you contribute to the topic, as far as I can remember.

Very kind of you Ernie, saved me the trouble...

[url= http://www.exaronews.com/content/child-sex-abuse-fernbridge-and-fairbank-exaro-story-thread ]anyhow, being as you evidently want some investigative material[/url]

alternatively,

[url= http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5284/every-mp-asked-to-back-inquiry-into-organised-child-sex-abuse ] if you're feeling too lazy for all of that, here is the crux of the matter
[/url]

I don't play it down, I state that I'm in favour of prescription and doubt the safety of prosecutions based on witness statements on events alleged to have taken place 40 years ago.

A claims culture has developed in the UK in which car park nudges result in whiplash claims, idiots that drive through standing water without walking through it first win claims against the council, and every rich and famous person is a potential target for gold diggers. 12 of the 13 cases against DLT were thrown out, what's happened to the remaining one? DLT has suffered enormously both mentally and finacially, guilty by media for emotive crimes that are being thrown out of court, and it isn't over for him yet.

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

Evidence and defence was put to a jury and they came back with Rolf is guilty, evidence and defence was put to the jury with DLT and he was found not guilty of all but one charge, system seems to be working. CPS think they have a good case so a retrial on the one charge.

Whether DLT should of been named is a different discussion completley as is should a innocent man be compensated for the money he has spent defending himself.

Edukator, one of his victims was 7.
And if you think the sexual assualt of children was acceptable or condoned in 60's Britain then you're deluding yourself.

+1.

12 people, having listened to all the evidence, found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Unless it's being suggested that he was fitted up, that's the end of the matter.

[i]Edukator - Troll[/i]

don't engage people.

Judging people for what they did back then by today's standards is unfair...

I've got a new favourite picture...

[img] [/img]

[url= http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rolf-harris-jimmy-savile-day-3791043 ]It appears evidence has emerged of Rolf attending Broadmoor with Savile, which is backed up by the NHS inquiry [/url] 😯

and lets not forget Jersey...

What truly baffles me is how Harris's wife and daughter where there to support him throughout his trial.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10936837/Rolf-Harris-daughter-said-inheriting-his-11-million-would-be-like-winning-lottery.html ]Daughter said that inheriting his 11 million would be like winning the lottery.[/url]