Emerging abuse stories
- Thread starter Wilf
- Start date
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Anyway, fuck all the dirty rapists and abusers in Parliament or on the telly, fuck the cunts who shredded the paperwork, fuck the BBC who spent decades never giving a shit, fuck Spiked, fuck the PR teams who worked for Harris and the rest of 'em, fuck the Catholic Church, fuck the Church of England - and for all her 'integrity', fuck m'lady Butler-Sloss.
Right, got that out of me system. We can now have a well behaved thread.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
shurely milady de winter?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Congratulations on such an excellent post.
I suspect that the security services have your home wired for sound.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
recent rumours have led to claims that various geological features of britain may face charges of paedophilia. however, i can confirm that no hills, mountains, dales, beaches, rivers or lakes are being looked into. a crag was briefly taken in for questioning but no charges resulted.
I can, however, confirm that there are strong links between the convicted-of-noncery 1970s and the 1980s. And the 1960s.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
dover police sources confirm other geological features may face further investigation.
Cliffs, perhaps?
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
There's something lurking in the shadows.
What amazes me is that half of those that are being exposed are the ones my dad always said were "wrong 'uns".. must be a sixth sensethe same as a fellow poster said about his deceased father.
Innit. It's not just your Dad either. It really is quite amazing how it's all the ones everyone always knew were horrible bastards--Saville, Davidson, Starr, DLT etc.
I could see that lot were nasty wankers and right bloody weirdos and general freakazoids when I was about 10. It was completely obvious ffs. How did the BBC miss it?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
we await developments
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I guess it's because organisations don't have the instincts that people do. That was a non-facetious answer, btw.
I think you forgot to mention the long and the short and the tall.
Apart from that, quite a good list.
I think it's because the BBC was run by upper-class twits who, in their patronizing ignorance, imagined that Freddie Starr, Jim Davidson and their wretched ilk were the sort of thing that ordinary people would enjoy.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
It's not just the BBC, though, is it?
No, it's the media as a whole.
I can honestly say that I never met anyone who liked Freddie Starr. So wtf was he doing on the telly?
People who worked around the likes of Savile often did suspect. There's several reasons why they felt they couldn't get their concerns acted upon. They're important because those reasons pertain today, in all sorts of organisations.
A comfortable lie is more easily born than an a horrific truth. Who would listen to a lowly member of staff, let alone the victims who felt too intimidated or stifled to speak out. Or those who were ignored when they did so. Or maybe despite best efforts in some cases, individual investigations couldn't amass enough evidence and they were disconnected from a wider picture.
Hirearchical organisations tend to rely on people not rocking the boat, knowing their place. If you don't fit so well into that, you're likely never getting any where near the levers of power and will be marginilised / sacked.
That's before you need any active conspiracy between wronguns to orchestrate a cover up.
Although FWIW I reckon there is a massive cover up going on here. You don't just lose files. No one does.
A comfortable lie is more easily born than an a horrific truth. Who would listen to a lowly member of staff, let alone the victims who felt too intimidated or stifled to speak out. Or those who were ignored when they did so. Or maybe despite best efforts in some cases, individual investigations couldn't amass enough evidence and they were disconnected from a wider picture.
Hirearchical organisations tend to rely on people not rocking the boat, knowing their place. If you don't fit so well into that, you're likely never getting any where near the levers of power and will be marginilised / sacked.
That's before you need any active conspiracy between wronguns to orchestrate a cover up.
Although FWIW I reckon there is a massive cover up going on here. You don't just lose files. No one does.
Last edited:
elbows
Well-Known Member
Surely these issues will also be being posted in the evidence thread making it a bit of a duplicate?
Can this not be the thread of argument and abuse keeping the evidence thread clean?
The other thread is, most of the time, concerned mostly with political figures linked to abuse. It is not clear if there is much more to come from the 'celebrity' stuff, but another thread is certainly needed if there is.
Right now this seems like a delicate moment to attempt to start a new thread for this stuff though, and not just because the bun-fighting that killed the other threads is still fresh. But also because there are no breaking news celeb stories to fill this thread full of on-topic talk, and because this does seem to be a moment where some posters, faced with many tempting dots to join and a bunch of silly games & hints in the press that fuel the need to blurt shit out, will feel unable to contain themselves, unable to adhere fully to the spirit of the rules of the forum regarding this stuff.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Possibly, possibly. Gary Glitter was back in the courts 2 weeks ago, but the surprise factor associated with that was akin to bears shitting in the woods.
Puddy_Tat
naturally fluffy
And again,
I don't wish to come across as a nonce-apologist, or to be awarded an U75 prefect's badge, but as someone else said on one of the threads that seems to have been buried in the litter tray, I have become reasonably attached to U75 in the last few years and I would be faintly miffed to see it disappear under a pile of libel writs...
I don't wish to come across as a nonce-apologist, or to be awarded an U75 prefect's badge, but as someone else said on one of the threads that seems to have been buried in the litter tray, I have become reasonably attached to U75 in the last few years and I would be faintly miffed to see it disappear under a pile of libel writs...
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
Sometimes I think May's idea of an overarching inquiry is a good one because if it's conducted properly it may uncover systemic failure of cognition, to put it politely. (Mind you, I think it would be great if someone invented a cold fusion reactor to solve the energy/CO2/radiation conundrum. Sometimes cold fusion seems more likely...)
It's worth looking at who is saying what, and for whose benefit. It's sad the way this whole thing is becoming politicised, as it's clear that (going by dead people) it wasn't confined to our Tory overlords and indeed there seems to have been some camaraderie between the alleged offenders. Hard to know the truth of any of it, but it's worth bearing in mind the impossible standards of proof in the 70s (effectively, the uncorroborated evidence of a juvenile victim wouldn't be enough to convict - so some of the allegations of police inaction may be no more sinister than a recognition that there was no chance of conviction). These days the rules of evidence give more liberty to the jury to judge the credibility of uncorroborated evidence from a juvenile. Not that we are dealing with juvenile witnesses here...
It's worth looking at who is saying what, and for whose benefit. It's sad the way this whole thing is becoming politicised, as it's clear that (going by dead people) it wasn't confined to our Tory overlords and indeed there seems to have been some camaraderie between the alleged offenders. Hard to know the truth of any of it, but it's worth bearing in mind the impossible standards of proof in the 70s (effectively, the uncorroborated evidence of a juvenile victim wouldn't be enough to convict - so some of the allegations of police inaction may be no more sinister than a recognition that there was no chance of conviction). These days the rules of evidence give more liberty to the jury to judge the credibility of uncorroborated evidence from a juvenile. Not that we are dealing with juvenile witnesses here...
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Agreed. The McAlpine case was at one extreme, he was misidentified and knew he could go in hard and openly. Some of those 'named' more recently may be a bit less keen to break cover. Same time it's not worth risking it.
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
He did have a dodgy picture collection by Graham Ovenden. Not that that makes him a nonce, just someone with a very questionable taste in art.
Similar threads
