The Rt DisHon Odious Fat Slug Heath PM
mr_goo
Posts: 3,755
Anyone surprised by the news in last the 24 hours? I'm not. At the end of last year I (correctly as now transpires) predicted to my friends that Heath would be revealed as the highest profile child abuser.
Just a shame that yet again another vile creature is 7 feet under long time, before the revelations come to light.
Just a shame that yet again another vile creature is 7 feet under long time, before the revelations come to light.
Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
0
Posts
We won't bother waiting until any evidence is disclosed then? :roll:
Correct. Guilty until proven innocent.
My wife met him in the late 90s and thought he was a slimey creep. And that is before this news.
Well, that's different then. Why didn't you say. Must be guilty.
Heaven forbid anyone here ever gets wrongly accused.
Does that include Clarkson?
Desmond Tutu
We shall see how this one plays out. But I do seem to recall that a couple of years back (during the Saville exposee) there were snippets of news about the cover up of a very senior politician.
I am of the left and found many of his views unpalatable. And although I am pro-EU, I was never the federalist he was. I found that rather too much and still do.
As to what he got up to in his private life, I have no particular interest but always believed he was probably gay. This was neither confirmed nor disproved in any biography I ever read. He certainly faced some opposition from within the party during his time as an MP, although I assumed that to be bmore because of his modest beginnings than his orientation.
As to the latest allegations, I find it odd (unusual) that it is whipping up a media storm and unhelpful that we are somehow behaving as if charges are going to be brought against a man who has been dead for several years and had no issue.
There are certainly still public figures who might usefully be brought to book for disgraceful and harmful abuses of others. I am not sure why we need to spend so much time and sweat on a case that is unlikely ever to be proved or disproved.
But the Internet disagrees with me....
If there is overwelming evidence fair enough but i d prefer to wait until then before passing judgment.
imho the only think he tried to bu&&er were the miners, with v. limited success.
It is too late for that, although the victims will feel very differently.
I am not sure. You have no chance.
Very much so.
A man dies he then relies on family to defend his memory. Who knows what is the truth? One person has come forward to claim an offence was committed against him. No matter what is provable or what is b true I feel sorry for that person. If true he's suffered, if not true he's suffering his delusion. Either way it's not good.
Here's hoping they'll find an MP offender who is still alive and able to defend himself. Until then I reckon we'll get more of these cases I reckon. Conspiracy in Westminster is one certainty though. Trust any MP? I'd check my watch and pockets after shaking any MPs hand I reckon. Of course those course in language and nature might say politicians have all been [email protected] us for years.
however, Bill Wyman gets off with a 13yo, in his 40's, and now sits on the set of Breakfast TV advertising his latest album?
Dont get it.
The Saville case was such an overwhelming situation that it easily merits public interest to get what facts they have out. If this Heath case is true and part of a ring in the seats of power protecting abusers in high places then it needs b investigation and prosecutions. It is public interest, IMHO only, if there is enough evidence that would lead to a successful prosecution if Heath was still alive or there is a prosecution for the covering up of crimes in high places. There's enough clever cops around to root out anything worthy of public interest. In the meantime we cannot know what is true.
The Saville case has done more to discredit the legal and police system as it ever will to credit it.
Police selling stories and info to media, allowing them to be present at "secret raids" etc etc.
Releasing peoples information of which I personally know of one, it all adds up to a right mess.
As a member of the public, it is not my place to know about police investigations, they are meant to be on a need to know basis until a case is put before a court and then when guilty let the cards fall where they may.
Insider knowledge? :P
seanoconn
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.
By the time it came out that Wyman had slept with Mandy Smith when she was under age (14 I believe) they had already been married. In such cases it is generally deemed to not be in the public interest to prosecute.
Probably not in the public interest to prosecute a member of the Rolling Stones you mean? i think any other 45yo would find himself in court.
the "values and public interest" back then were what allowed Saville and many others to carry on on they did.
I fully support the principle of "innocent until proven guilty", BUT, if you have a legal system that turns a blind eye to certain types of allegation, especially allegations of sex crimes against children, then the gap will be filled in, and the presumption of innocence (in the eyes of the public, not legal system) will be endangered. It's a 2-way street. The public should respect certain legal principles, but in return we should have faith in the system and in this case it's the public that has been betrayed first.
I have no more idea than anyone else if he is guilty or not, but I would have thought that it would have been quite easy for the IPCC to ask this woman if there was any substance to the claim before they went public.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/05/investigation-edward-heath-child-abuse-claims-go-national