William Roach cleared of charges

Garry H

antfly wrote:

There was a bit of a celeb witch hunt after Saville, DJs and comedians and Corrie stars, it seems that the cps have been a bit too keen to bring charges at times, but how come no pop or rock stars have been arrested? There must be plenty of underage groupies, we all know about Bill Wyman for a start, that would be an open and shut case ? I am sure if he was a disc jockey..

Ahh, but you don't remember Len Faircolugh do you?? The rot started with him

Garry H

antfly wrote:

They can, but they obviously don't want to. She has to co-operate as a witness.

Correct. Would be seen as statutory rape, i believe.

chrisaonabike

Slowmart wrote:

That said I could be totally wrong and all jurors are all 100% unbiased pillars of the community with no social or political hang ups and weigh the evidence before them in a reasonable and thorough way..........

I've served on a jury. I now have an enduring distrust in the jury system. Over three cases in two weeks, each jury I served on consisted of two people that were intelligent enough to understand the evidence and unbiased enough to be fair. The others were either deeply prejudiced or completely thick, or both.

It's a wonder there's ever any justice.

zanelad

Garry H wrote:

Ahh, but you don't remember Len Faircolugh do you?? The rot started with him

I do, but he shot himself in the foot by selling his story to the papers and "The Street" wouldn't take him back. He died alone and in poverty despite being acquitted.

Ray Langton (real name Neville, can't recall his first name) was also rummoured to be a "fiddler" but he refuses to return to the UK from the USA.

Must be something in the Weatherfield water that corrupts..... :shock:

As for DLT, he looks to me like a man who knows that the game is up and is going down.

Garry H

Zanelad wrote:

As for DLT, he looks to me like a man who knows that the game is up and is going down.

I'm sure there's a joke in there somewhere, but I'll resist

Pross

antfly wrote:

They can, but they obviously don't want to. She has to co-operate as a witness.

Assuming she is still on reasonable terms with him all she would have to say was 'we were just friends until after I was 16' and unless she was actually witnessed in the act by a third party no-one could prove otherwise.

antfly

She has written it or admitted to it in interviews in the past, at least once. They had sex when she was 13, I think she said. Of course she could perjure herself but witnesses wouldn't have to have witnessed the act itself anyway, to give evidence.

Pross

antfly wrote:

She has written it or admitted to it in interviews in the past, at least once. They had sex when she was 13, I think she said. Of course she could perjure herself but witnesses wouldn't have to have witnessed the act itself anyway, to give evidence.

'Yes, but I just said that at the time to gain publicity / sell my book. Now I'm under oath I have to admit that nothing really happened'. That's why there is no point forcing the victim to give evidence if they don't want to. I suspect the CPS know that hence why they have never pursued it.

antfly

I am sure you are right, it's down to her and her mother, really. Was he ever even arrested and questioned though, like all the others ?

owenlars

ChrisAOnABike wrote:

I've served on a jury. I now have an enduring distrust in the jury system. Over three cases in two weeks, each jury I served on consisted of two people that were intelligent enough to understand the evidence and unbiased enough to be fair. The others were either deeply prejudiced or completely thick, or both.
It's a wonder there's ever any justice.

I have done three lots of jury service and can only agree. However I suspect, along with democracy, it is the least bad system there is.

MaxwellBygraves

Dave Lee Travis cleared on all counts too.

zanelad

It seems the only one doing bird is Stuart Hall and he confessed.

DLT wlll be insufferable now.

VTech

Im waiting for David Jason and the two ronnies to be tried in a court of law.

What a waste of public money just to try and get past the fact they didn't act on saville.

bianchimoon

VTech wrote:

Im waiting for David Jason and the two ronnies to be tried in a court of law.

Won't that be very difficult?

arran77

bianchimoon wrote:

VTech wrote:

Im waiting for David Jason and the two ronnies to be tried in a court of law.

Won't that be very difficult?

Perhaps we can have a mass exhumation of possible peodos

VTech

You don't have to be a peodo to be drawn into this round of idiocy by the CPS.
DLT charged under the same scenario as the saville case for smacking a womans bum, same as Jim Davidson so by my reckoning, David Jason smacking the barmaids bum in an episode of only fools and horses and the two ronnies for similar need to be bought to trial.

Hell, whilst we are at it, I want the midget charged from kenny everret show and up in court.

arran77

Why stop with the midget, the man himself looks pretty iffy in my opinion :shock:

cornerblock

That'll be the small claims court.

nathancom

VTech wrote:

You don't have to be a peodo to be drawn into this round of idiocy by the CPS.
DLT charged under the same scenario as the saville case for smacking a womans bum, same as Jim Davidson so by my reckoning, David Jason smacking the barmaids bum in an episode of only fools and horses and the two ronnies for similar need to be bought to trial.

Hell, whilst we are at it, I want the midget charged from kenny everret show and up in court.

Yes because they are rich and famous they couldn't possibly have done it and if they did something similar the women involved should have felt grateful for someone so famous being willing to show them attention. What a surprise to see you arguing their side. I am sure you would have backed up Stuart Hall the same as this if he hadn't been forced to change his plea by the weight of evidence.

Whilst it is right that they be found innocent in the face of insufficient evidence, this witch hunt, as you have so often attempted to portray it, has already led to the incarceration of a sick old man who fiddled with pre pubescent girls. Give you celeb brown-nosing a rest. Thanks.

Kendal Black Drop

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Dave Lee Travis cleared on all counts too.

Not quite, the jury failed to reach a verdict on two charges.

The Telegraph wrote:

...his acquittal on historic sex charges, his innocence reaffirmed on 12 of the 14 charges he faced...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -hunt.html

The Telegraph wrote:

Despite being cleared of 12 counts of indecent assault, Mr Travis’s ordeal is not over after the jury failed to reach verdicts on two of the charges.
The Crown Prosecution Service will now consider whether to hold a retrial on the two outstanding charges, which relate to allegations from 1991 and 2008.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... arges.html

VTech

nathancom wrote:

VTech wrote:

You don't have to be a peodo to be drawn into this round of idiocy by the CPS.
DLT charged under the same scenario as the saville case for smacking a womans bum, same as Jim Davidson so by my reckoning, David Jason smacking the barmaids bum in an episode of only fools and horses and the two ronnies for similar need to be bought to trial.

Hell, whilst we are at it, I want the midget charged from kenny everret show and up in court.

Yes because they are rich and famous they couldn't possibly have done it and if they did something similar the women involved should have felt grateful for someone so famous being willing to show them attention. What a surprise to see you arguing their side. I am sure you would have backed up Stuart Hall the same as this if he hadn't been forced to change his plea by the weight of evidence.

Whilst it is right that they be found innocent in the face of insufficient evidence, this witch hunt, as you have so often attempted to portray it, has already led to the incarceration of a sick old man who fiddled with pre pubescent girls. Give you celeb brown-nosing a rest. Thanks.

No, but if he had been found guilty he would have deserved all the punishment the law allows.
I am on the side of law and a mans right to a fair trial.
If found guilty they need to be locked away depending on the crime, maybe for life.

"You" view things on a monetary level, not me.

ballysmate

Jimmy Tarbuck in the clear by the looks of it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

VTech

Ballysmate wrote:

Jimmy Tarbuck in the clear by the looks of it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

I think this whole thing is a travesty, not just for the wrongly accused but mainly for the innocent victims who have endured the agonising reality of rape and sexual abuse.
Just like why a rape case is so hard to prove, these matters will also end the same as so many lie and make false accusations which in turn stops people believing the truth which in some cases means guilty walk free.