[Closed] Oh Rolf 🙁

Edukator. What do you think of an earlier comment that childhood abuse leads to displays of attention neediness and lack of empathy in later life?

A well-argued post against prescription, Mrs Toast.

One of the arguments in favour of prescription is that those who do not denounce crimes within a reasonable time period are negligent. For this reason the prescription time starts from the age of 18 for crimes against children so that they have adequate time to denounce the crimes suffered as children when adult. If you don't immediately denounce a crime you should have, you are negligent and further crimes could result from your negligence.

" Le dépérissement des preuves" the erosion of evidence with time, especially the reliability of witness statements is another justification.

Perhaps the most important though is that raising issues from years before is traumatic for all concerned and society in general. In the interest of "la paix et la tranquillité publique" (which I don't think needs translating) events should be forgotten rather than brought back to life.

There is a notion of rehabilitation with time. Even if you burgled a house in your youth, if you've committed no other crime since then it indicates you are reformed person that society no longer needs protection from.

especially the reliability of witness statements

As it's in a similar vein to your earlier suggestion I seek the help of a counselor I'll assume that's another gratuitous personal attack rather than a real question, Woppit.

Edit: we're not in court here and I'm not going to become rich by lying, Junkyard. That you doubt my sincerity is not unreasonable while your doubts remain in your head. That you publicly accuse me of lying on a specific point is libel.

Perhaps the most important though is that raising issues from years before is traumatic for all concerned and society in general. In the interest of "la paix et la tranquillité publique" (which I don't think needs translating) events should be forgotten rather than brought back to life.

Poor old Rolf, lets leave him alone then shall we? And are we to assume his victims suffering diminshed in the meantime yet was raised again since this became public?

Should we forget WW1? Or Slavery? Or sweep Hitlers actions under the carpet?

There is a notion of rehabilitation with time. Even if you burgled a house in your youth, if you've committed no other crime since then it indicates you are reformed person that society no longer needs protection from.

So you manage to get away with for so long, your slate is wiped clean? what does that teach our kids?

Edukator,
Was Rolf in France when theses crimes occurred?
Did you read konabunny's comments regarding your continual monotonous droning regarding this? I believe konabunny is a practicing law person. Go back and re read it.

konabunny
This concept already exists in English law, it's just expressed differently. The court can stay proceedings if it would be an abuse of process or unfair to the defendant. It's not a "one size fits all" rule as "prescription"/statutory limitation periods are.
But even before it gets to Court, the prosecutors will have to be satisfied they have sufficient evidence to get a conviction.

And even after it gets to Court, the jury can simply find the defendant not guily for any reason they like, including because they think it is unfair due to the passage of time, because the evidence is so old and shaky that it doesn't remove reasonable doubt, or because - you know - they just don't think he did it. But the jury heard all the evidence and they didn't make any of those choices.

[b]Really I think you are banging away about nothing at this point.[/b]

Remind us of your legal qualifications.

Edukator - Troll
As it's in a similar vein to your earlier suggestion I seek the help of a counselor I'll assume that's another gratuitous personal attack rather than a real question, Woppit.

Not at all. It's a real question.

1. Deter others
2. Punish the offender
3. Rehabilitate
4. Education
5. protect society

There doesn't seem to be very much focus on the benefit for the victims that prosecuting Harris might have brought.

And personally like most people I'm more concerned with his victims than with Harris.

After all while Harris might be able to put the past behind him his victims have to live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of their lives.

So to try and correct that a bit :

[url= http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/2390113/rolf-harris-victim-tonya-lee-cries-with-relief-over-verdict/?cs=12 ]Rolf Harris victim Tonya Lee cries with relief over verdict[/url]

[i][b]A Wollongong woman sexually abused by Rolf Harris who testified against him cried with relief when expressing her happiness at his guilty verdict.[/i][/b]

If this case has brought some sort of closure to his victims and they can move on with their lives because justice has been served then it will have been worth it just for that.

Sadly in the case of Savile's victims they have to live with the fact that he got away scot free with the crimes that he committed against them.

It's a tragedy that Savile didn't get prosecuted, we should be celebrating the fact that Harris has, even if his crimes aren't to the same magnitude.

Should we forget WW1? Or Slavery? Or sweep Hitlers actions under the carpet?

There is no prescription for those crimes, see the Claus Barbie trial and the current claims against Bordeaux slave trading families. The prescription time is set according to the type of crime and has recently been increased for crimes against children.

It teaches kids (and everybody else) to denounce a crime immediately before anyone else suffers.

Konabunny slags me off whatever I type on here, Iolo, just like you. Others take the trouble to read what I post first.

Konabunny slags me off whatever I type on here

Have you considered not saying stupid things ?

OOPS my mistakes it is advanced trolling to just ignore legitimate points as hate fuelled diatribes.
Well played...you are the victim here yes?

But konabunny is stating the law in the uk, not France or outer mongolia or wherever you can find a law where a crime here is deemed less of a disgusting thing than here.
I have not seen any konabunny slagging you off. I am merely asking you questions and have not said a single bad word against you. Please provide evidence if you believe I have.

That you publicly accuse me of lying on a specific point is libel.

You would need to prove his view was false for that to be case.

Others take the trouble to read what I post first.

To fair you don't always make it clear exactly what you mean. Take this for example :

[i]I've got used to declining advances from gays which started in my teens, there might be something about me that attracts them. It's usually a lot less complicated than declining advances from women.[/i]

By "a lot less complicated than declining advances from women" do you mean that women, unlike men, are reluctant take no for an answer - have I got that right ?

Obviously I want to get it right because I can see that you feel the point is important enough that it warrants being mentioned on this thread.

Although I do sometimes get the impression that what you mean varies after the event depending on the reaction it causes.

Konabunny slags me off whatever I type on here

In their defence they slag any one off who says stupid things

So Konabunny is more than one person ?

Well that helps to explain why they always appear to be so well-informed and clever.

Edukator - Troll

It teaches kids (and everybody else) to denounce a crime immediately before anyone else suffers

No definitively it doesn't and there's no solid evidence of that, like they'll be no solid evidence of what I'm about to say; that is, it may also teach kids that if they can hide a crime long enough they'll get away with it. This then logically leads to a society where the biggest crime is in the hiding of the crime itself, lead back round to Saville, Harris and onto the conspiracy theories posted on here that allude to MP's, Royalty and Senior society figures being involved.

No thanks. You commit a crime, you get punished - should be the lesson.

That you doubt my sincerity is not unreasonable while your doubts remain in your head*. That you publicly accuse me of lying on a specific point is libel.

* Nice use of a not to subtle dig... we are seeing all the skills being used today. Thanks

So Konabunny is more than one person ?

I was using this pronoun as a gender-neutral singular rather than as a plural pronoun, it signifies I have no idea what gender they are and nothing more.

Hmmmm, the previous page has changed. Did you edit or was it the moderators, Junkyard?

Either way I'm out.

neither of those claims are factually accurate as far as I can tell.

Amusing you would make an inaccurate statement as a parting gift 😛
This has not left me more inclined to believe your accounts - hell even you think eyewitness testimony , from a long time ago , is unreliable so why are you getting upset with me for agreeing with you 😉

I am merely asking you questions and have not said a single bad word against you. Please provide evidence if you believe I have.

What will you discuss next week, Necrophiliacs?
You'll be fapping all week after this one's done.

You're welcome.

The shovel has left the building...

Kryton-maybe not the biggest crime but perhaps one worthy of equal punishment?

But yes I agree pretty much 100% with what you and Mrs Toast have said

What do you think of an earlier comment that childhood abuse leads to displays of attention neediness and lack of empathy in later life?

Re-reading it appears that the abuse in question was corporal punishment not sexual abuse. I'm aware you don't claim that but I took it that way. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

But in answer - not necessarily.

Jailing Rolf though, his careers ruined he is 84 years old his family must loathe him blimey and the public vilification will probably be enough.

So if he was poor and not famous, he should go to jail?

@ teasel: Any abuse, sexual or otherwise, suffered when young, leaves it's mark. I was honestly trying to get "Edukator" to consider the point in his own case. Unfortunately, he thought I was attacking him...

On reflection perhaps that was a bit insensitive in an open forum. 😳

Any abuse, sexual or otherwise, suffered when young, leaves it's mark.

Most definitely, but that doesn't have to mean an individual is incapable of normal behaviour or outlook on life (whatever the **** that's supposed to be anyway). Everyone will respond differently to abuse and where some will be mistrustful and closed, others can be extravert and all too eager to please - there's no hard and fast rule and sweeping generalisations like Junkyard threw out there are just used to ridicule, in my opinion. Whatever the damage, it can be dealt with quite effectively with a psychotherapist and willingness on behalf of the client to confront or even just express their experiences to someone, anyone in fact, without the notion of prejudices and preconceptions.

Of course. Sorry, are you making a point?

grantus - Member
Kryton-maybe not the biggest crime but perhaps one worthy of equal punishment?

In my view yes. To hide a crime is to acknowledge you knew it was a crime and attempted to deceive to avoid punishment - right?

are you making a point?

Don't think so. Maybe that there was nothing in Edukator's posts to suggest neediness or lack of empathy.

@teasel

iolo - Member
This has to be one of your best Troll ever Edukator.
You against everybody.
What will you discuss next week, Necrophiliacs?
You'll be fapping all week after this one's done.

Please quote me correctly if you must. It seems you missed out the first sentence.
Find another Edukator slagging off if you want but congratulating him on his trolling abilities and giving him ideas for his next is not slagging off.

Kryton - yes I was agreeing with you

Don't think so. Maybe that there was nothing in Edukator's posts to suggest neediness or lack of empathy.

Well, someone earlier pointed out how two people standing next to each other can have a completely different perception of the same event...

Touché

Iolo - if you feel the comment I quoted wasn't you having a pop and just asking him questions, you go on believing that.

I feel pretty sad about his conviction. apart from the fact that he was a horrible peado! I's like a small part of my younger childhood innocence died. Who's next? Tony Hart, Mr Bennet or Morph? seriously, that Rolf could convince a whole nation that he was a nice friendly arty sort of uncle is going to make us nice arty uncles look like horrible ****s. 🙁

Sorry, Iolo, that was a tad dismissive of me. What I meant to get across was suggesting that someone will be banging one out for a week is wrong. Not only can it give one an overdeveloped arm, it also causes extreme friction burns and the resulting blisters will only serve as a forced sabbatical from the company of the Five Sisters.

Whichever way you look at it I don’t feel it was a constructive comment, in all honesty. I mean, what if he hadn't thought about that option and decided it was the best action after what is, after all, a successful troll...

no problem.

I've got used to declining [b]advances from gays[/b] which started in my teens, there might be something about me that attracts [b]them[/b].

:{ oh dear. And he used to teach?

he had to leave due to the racism he faced as he was white in england iirc

[ welcome back Dr 😉 ]

Who's next? Tony Hart, Mr Bennet or Morph?

3 Hrs and no-ones done the 'playdohfile' joke?

:{ oh dear.

If you're going to be sensitive at least be balanced. Ernie Lynch wrote the following a few pages back but in your haste to join those sticking the boot in you seem to have missed it...

In fact the 1970s was considerably more intolerant of anything to do with [b]gay[/b] sex than now. The age of consent for [b]gays[/b] was 21

I'm notoriously non-PC, I don't teach and never have. HTH

I didn't quote the teaching bit. It doesn't bother me and I'm not PC either. I posted it for a bit of balance, as stated. HTH.

As you're loitering - how do you feel about the "ludicrous" statement now you've been presented with accounts of it taking place?

One of the arguments in favour of prescription is that those who do not denounce crimes within a reasonable time period are negligent. For this reason the prescription time starts from the age of 18 for crimes against children so that they have adequate time to denounce the crimes suffered as children when adult. If you don't immediately denounce a crime you should have, you are negligent and further crimes could result from your negligence.

I don't think that having a limitation period of prosecution of these crimes does anything to encourage reporting, at least in the field of sexual assault. I don't think that there are many sexual assault victims thinking "you know, I really must get around to popping down to be police and reporting that assault" that just need a kick up the arse from the law to make them focus better - I think there are probably other reasons why assaults are not reported. Saying to a victim "well, you took too long to do it, so we are just going to let him off" doesn't send a message to other victims that they should feel comfortable reporting crimes.

TBH I find to believe that what you say above is really a principle behind "prescription" in French law (as opposed to your own interpretation p) but otoh I know sod all about French law and surprises pop up all the time.

If you're going to be sensitive at least be balanced. Ernie Lynch wrote the following a few pages back but in your haste to join those sticking the boot in you seem to have missed it..

Are you seriously asking me to go through all the posts and highlight all the cases where I think appropriate terminology is used? Besides which, if you think that the term 'gay' is what was wrong with the post, then you have missed the point.

Oh, by the way, being non-PC is not a thing of which one should be proud

Well you seem to have managed to find it in Edukator's posts and not Ernie's, so as I wrote, it was for balance. I think I get the point - it's the segregation by using the word 'them', right.

As for the PC bit - I don't really give a shit what your opinion on that is TBH.

Why do folk engage in a "debate" by raising points they say dont bother them ?
Personally I think you do get a wee bit upset at PC or else you would have walked away.

I think I get the point - it's the segregation by using the word 'them', right.

Personally I think you do get a wee bit upset at PC or else you would have walked away.

I'd rather think for myself than make a decision based on whatever's in fashion. If I offend someone and become aware of that then I'd rather look inward for the reason than think I was wrong because it was the right thing to do.

Probably best not to make assumptions on what I mean by not PC, though.

Also, Ernie's response to my quote kind of suggests his attitudes are similar to that which Charlie Mungus tried to hint Edukator's are, if you get my drift. Not that I think either are raving loonies where the subject of homosexuality is concerned.

Why do folk engage in a "debate" by raising points they say dont bother them ?

I'll write it one more time - balance. Charlie Mungus's post takes a shot at Edukator, not for his opinion on the thread subject but for his terminology concerning homosexuals and the fact he taught folk at some time or another. It was an attempt to insult or humiliate and to call into question whether or not he was fit to teach, nothing more. It was a bit pathetic, if you ask me. A cheap shot...

I think I get the point - it's the segregation by using the word 'them', right.

It was a bit pathetic, if you ask me. A cheap shot..

I don't really give a shit what your opinion on that is TBH

Wrong

Then, please, correct me.

I'll give you a clue. It is in Edukator's post but not in Ernie's.

I don't like playing guessing games. Why not just spell it out - surely there's no problem in doing so...

Well, yes there is. You will experience a deeper understanding if you think about what might be wrong. Reflection on possible reasons will help your breadth of understanding too. If i were to just tell you, the surface learning you would achieve as a result would not be useful knowledge. Part of the process must involve a desire to learn and understand, it needs some commitment from you too. Ultimately, you have no interest in what is wrong with the paragraph.

You forgot to add[i] Grasshopper[/i] to the end of that...

🙂

Ultimately, you have no interest in what is wrong with the paragraph.

That's a big assumption on your part; I have a genuine interest or else I wouldn't be responding to your posts.

I'm glad to hear it. In that case I look forward to your reflections on what might have been wrong with what Edukator wrote.

C'mon, spill the beans. Prove you're not just being bitter because I disagree with you. I get the whole self discovery stuff but I think you're being awkward because you're feeling hurt or something.

Just tell me - I can deal with the surface learning shit you mention...

Unless, of course, it's a grammar thing. I'm shit with grammar...

Okay, then. You go on sulking or trying to humiliate me or better me or whatever it is you think you're doing.

I was actually, for once, trying to have a sensible discussion as opposed to making facetious comments like I usually do. Obviously you have other intentions.

[img] [/img]

Argh, too slow!

Would you believe it...

[IMG] [/IMG]

We can't go on together, with suspicious minds...

🙂

I just wanna know what his view or perception of that post is. It obviously differs from mine but apparently it's the only view to have and one needs to be more mindful or contemplative in order to elucidate the deeper meaning.

I don't see the problem with just expressing what it is you want to get across instead of all this ambiguity. It's a mugs game...

Also, Ernie's response to my quote kind of suggests his attitudes are similar to that which Charlie Mungus tried to hint Edukator's are, if you get my drift.

Charlie Mungus isn't responsible for what I say and post, I am.

What's your point?

My reason for that was to show another user with similar outlooks to that which Charlie appears to have commented on with regard to Edukators post. I don't get why this is so hard to understand.

lol @ spacemonkey

I don't get why this is so hard to understand.

CM has responded with the very obvious response :

[i]Are you seriously asking me to go through all the posts and highlight all the cases where I think appropriate terminology is used? [/i]

You can expect him to know what he himself has posted but not everything I've posted.

I don't get why this is so hard to understand.

Because he went back far enough to see Edukator's and not yours. All seems a bit selective. I'll put my hand up and apologise if I'm wrong but I get the impression it's all a bit personal where Edukator's concerned and all and sundry feel it's okay to insult him because he has the troll attachment. It's **** bollocks and you know it.

I wish I knew what sort of kick you guys get from it...

Ok, that's long enough to think about it. What ideas have you come up with? In what ways could the post from Edukator have been deemed inappropriate?

You mean, how do I think [b]you[/b] perceive Edukator's post, surely. How I read it and you read it are going to be totally different. I think that's quite clear by now.

What you seem to be avoiding is why you chose to comment on that and not his views on jailing Rolf Harris. I'm intrigued to know your motivations.

You mean, how do I think you perceive Edukator's post, surely.

No, no, no. I mean how could it be perceived, in general, not by any specific person.

What you seem to be avoiding is why you chose to comment on that and not his views on jailing Rolf Harris. I'm intrigued to know your motivations.

Fine, but let's do one thing at a time

Ernie also has so far avoided commenting on whether or not it's still a ludicrous notion that kids reporting sexual assault would be dismissed by parents or adults. I'm genuinely curious given the tales on this thread.

You know you two could pick up a phone, dont you?

No, no, no. I mean how could it be perceived, in general, not by any specific person.

Like I write, it's all rather pointless given the idiosyncratic nature of perception. I know you think you're being smart but the developed person's reaction should be to express oneself with clarity and sincerity. I think you just like to play games - for what reason, I wouldn't like to speculate.

I wouldn't like to speculate.

I think that has become clear. In which case we'll have to leave it there. But thanks for trying.

For clarification:

"Gay" as a word is absolutely no problem where I've lived for the last quarter of a century. [url= http://www.gaypride.fr/ ]Gaypride[/url] is the most visible organisation promoting equality for and tolerance of homosexuals, and an internationally recognised "brand". I'm surprised the word "gay" causes offense but if someone links something in a reputable paper to suggest I shouldn't use it on this British-based forum I'll stop. [url= http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/slang/homosexual-slang-terms.html ]Dictionaries say using the word gay is fine.[/url]

"them" refers to the gay men who made/make advances to me. Grammatically it's correct, the lexical structure of the sentence fine. There is no other alternative for "them".

Boom! There goes the forum version of a defibrillator ^^ 😀

I think that has become clear. In which case we'll have to leave it there. But thanks for trying.

Really? I think you know you're deliberately misunderstanding what you've quoted.

Why so childish, Charlie? I don't understand what I've done to deserve such contempt.

Boom! There goes the forum version of a defibrillator

Really? I see it as more of a tazer; CMs opinions of intent or meaning aren't relevant when you have it straight from the horses mouth. I'm sure that won't be the case, though...

And for Konabunny, the latest Sénat debate on préscription [url= http://www.senat.fr/rap/r06-338/r06-338_mono.html#toc11 ]Sénat[/url]. You'll find all the justifications I posted for prescription in there, and more.

From page 10

Edukator - troll

Either way I'm out

Possibly listen to yourself?

Will this thread please end?

It's going round and round like an attention seeking dog chasing it's tail.

Either way I'm out

Is he one of them?