Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I for one am still in shock over this. Cannot believe he would do this sort of thing, it sickens me and makes me doubt the sincerity of major institutions who allowed these people to get away with this sort of thing for decades. How was this so? Times have hopefully changed for the better, and such things could not and would not be allowed to happen under the public gaze so brazenly today as they clearly were in the 60s/70s and even 80s.


Louisa.

Peadophiles are expert at hiding their crimes. Always have been and always will be. I would like to think that children today though are far more able to report inappropriate behaviour and that the authorities are much quicker to act when allegations are made.


What I think is most appalling is that circles around Saville, Gary Glitter etc all knew what was going on, but without victims coming forward, they were impossible to prosecute, or fire for that matter.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ratty Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Still praying for Edmonds here!

>

> Yeah! Let's hope that more children have been

> abused! That would be brill.



Do you really think that is what I meant? Please, please answer that!

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you really think that is what I meant? Please,

> please answer that!


I'm sure you meant it as a joke, and are not literally praying that Noel Edmonds is guilty of child abuse.


Can't wait to hear the next one.

gee Steve - I dunno


Given how these peolpe were famous and used their power to abuse children, who finally came to testify having repeatedly seen them on TV, I suspect "ordinary" abusers will be caught (or escape) via other means


Not sure what your real point is?

Exactly... the media makes sure that any case involving a defendent in the public eye automatically becomes high profile. That's not to say that "ordinary blokes" aren't caught too.


Saying that, these are not ordinary cases. These guys had an almost unique "opportunity"... access to hundreds and hundreds of children, and a degree of fame which would have given them a strong influence over their victims. But of course it also meant that in years to come when the victims had the courage to face up to what happened, the perpetrator was rather easy to find.

I think the Met are obsessed with bringing down criminals, some of whom are celebs


What's the suggestion here steveo, the Met back off celebs. And for every high profile celeb i'm sure there's 100's of Joe Bloggs sex offenders caught and prosecuted, tho of those i'm not sure how many have promoted a campaign for children of abuse to speak out. Or how many had such easy access to children and institutions

The suggestion is that the Met likes dragging down celebs pure and simple.


And hypocrisy. I wonder how many honest bobbies have teen sections on their laptops and make ribald comments about sixteen year-old page three girls.


I find press speculation that Rolf will die in prison pretty unedifying.


If the mob had its way he'd be hanging from a lamp post

steveo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And hypocrisy. I wonder how many honest bobbies

> have teen sections on their laptops and make

> ribald comments about sixteen year-old page three girls.


Possibly. Maybe. It's pure speculation so doesn't really mean anything. And you could say something similar about lots of (lesser) crimes. How many policemen have smoked a joint, driven above 70mph, got in a fight, etc. Doesn't mean the police shouldn't continue to apprehend people guilty of these things.


> I find press speculation that Rolf will die in prison pretty unedifying.


I can certainly agree with that bit.

Has anyone read a good summary of the trial and wjat evidence was presented. I'm not saying he's innocent at all, I'm just genuinely interested on how a jury comes to finding him guilty of 12 separate counts of something based mainly on accusation.


Is it simply because of the number of accusations and the fact they came from people that didn't know each other?


It just seems like there was little burden of proof, but I don't know how these things work.


DaveR?

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not just cynical steve but your actually starting

> to be insulting to people who have suffered

> plenty.

>

> You don't believe them that's up to you


Strafer, was he found guilty as a result as a result of irrefutable evidence or on the balance of probability, or because the allegatiosn were beyond reasonable doubt? I find it odd that, like Saville, these allegations seem to go go back years and have only been pursued by the victims now. That is probably why some perhaps feel the lure of compo may have been the main motivating factor. I don't say thse people haven't been abused, just need to clearly understand why the huge delay in bringing matters to court.

because yewtree is a large, public process


For years people like this have been abused and most importantly for people wondering "why now", not believed when they dared try and tell anyone


But if you have that sort of history, only for a large public investigation come along, finally FINALLY you might feel someone wil lbelieve you now (if not now, when?)


In the midst of this she saw Rolf doing the Royal Gala last year and that was a trigger apparently


You can't get done for something like this on "balance of probability" (otherwise someone like rebekah brooks might not have been given a not guilty sentence)


But maybe we should just do away with the jury system and ask what people on internet forums think instead

I don't think you can dismiss the probability of people saying things for compo, or coming forward about something that really hadn't bothered them at the time once they realised they could make a bigger thing of it.


BUT


The sheer number of people coming forward independently of each other should be enough to show that something was going on.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...