Rolf Harris: dead at last

[ice-is-forming]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...n-lauren-martell/story-fncz7kyc-1226633857639

Mr Harris has been interviewed by British police twice in relation to alleged sexual offenses.

The 83-year-old was questioned but not charged as part of Operation Yewtree, which was sparked by the outing of British television entertainer Jimmy Savile as a child-sex predator.

The allegations against Harris are not linked to Savile and it is understood that he vehemently denies any wrongdoing.

 

[butchersapron]

Who next? Jimmy Savile?

 

[gabi]

Seems crazy that aussie/kiwi papers were able to report this as far back as october last year but the papers here had their hands tied. Leveson for the win.

 

[Teaboy]

If convicted will he get extradited?

 

[ice-is-forming]

If convicted will he get extradited?

Hopefully!

 

[Geri]

I hear Thatcher is dead as well.

 

[The39thStep]

 

[Idaho]

Rumours around Harris predate the flipping Internet. If there was tittle tattle way back when, it is unsurprising that he has had his collar felt.

 

[danny la rouge]

Any news of how Elvis is?

 

[8ball]

Any news of how Elvis is?

The constipation is a lot better, I hear.

 

[elbows]

Seems crazy that aussie/kiwi papers were able to report this as far back as october last year but the papers here had their hands tied. Leveson for the win.

As I'e said before I doubt it has much to do with Leveson since the papers had no trouble naming most of the other celebrities arrested as part of Yewtree.

But it is interesting why they decided not to name him until recently.

As for foreign media, it was probably late November not October, since he was first questioned but not arrested back then. Quite a lot of people in the uk knew back then though too since in addition to media workers & their friends who will gossip about stuff that is known but not printed, someone named him on twitter back then.

 

[butchersapron]

In the case of Roache it was the warwickshire police who decided to name him and publicly said there is no central guidance, it's up to each force.

 

[elbows]

In the case of Roache it was the warwickshire police who decided to name him and publicly said there is no central guidance, it's up to each force.

Think you may have mixed up two stories there? Warwickshire police got in trouble recently for bullshitting about guidelines after they initially refused to name one of their own who was arrested on suspicion of nicking money from the former police HQ. They later backed down and named him. I think Roache was arrested by Lancashire police who did not name him.

 

[butchersapron]

Think you may have mixed up two stories there? Warwickshire police got in trouble recently for bullshitting about guidelines after they initially refused to name one of their own who was arrested on suspicion of nicking money from the former police HQ. They later backed down and named him. I think Roache was arrested by Lancashire police who did not name him.

Yeah i did. How i don't know. I even know that lancashire isn't in warwickshire Their reading btw was:

In keeping with national policy Warwickshire Police does not name suspects on arrest.

The force may, however, name suspects on charge unless it is inappropriate to do so.

Crystal clear and well worth whatever the force pays someone for.

 

[yardbird]

Rolf:
Charged this morning -
9 x indecent assault, 4 x making indecent pictures

The making pictures charges are a defense nightmare.

 

[Manter]

God, depressing. Not sure there is a childhood icon left that wasn't up to something dodgy

 

[Barking_Mad]

Making indecent images isnt a jailable offence in itself. I knew someone who did the same, got community service. The other things, well that's all together different.

 

[el-ahrairah]

, 4 x making indecent pictures

"d'yer know what it is yet?"

 

[butchersapron]

Making indecent images isnt a jailable offence in itself. I knew someone who did the same, got community service. The other things, well that's all together different.

Depends on the severity of the image - level 4 or 5 and you're going to jail.

 

[8ball]

Depends on the severity of the image - level 4 or 5 and you're going to jail.

Does the level depend on how you make the image or just the content of the image?

 

[editor]

Please note that he hasn't been convicted yet so the usual rules apply.

 

[wiskey]

God, depressing. Not sure there is a childhood icon left that wasn't up to something dodgy

If they cart off Bernard Cribbins I'm going to sulk!

 

[butchersapron]

Does the level depend on how you make the image or just the content of the image?

Here's the handy sentencing guide. Key bit for your question would be the 'Taking, distributing, publishing or possession with a view to distribute or show' being the offence. So both and i would expect making them to be punished more severely. Looking at that in more detail it appears only level one will get you a community order. The rest are all jail.

 

[editor]

Depends on the severity of the image - level 4 or 5 and you're going to jail.

I've never heard of this level rating for indecent photos. Is there a (non illustrated, please!) guide anywhere?

*edit: ah, you've just posted it up

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

God, depressing. Not sure there is a childhood icon left that wasn't up to something dodgy

I bet John Craven is as clean as a whistle.

 

[butchersapron]

I've never heard of this level rating for indecent photos. Is there a (non illustrated, please!) guide anywhere?

Just linked to it above.

 

[fogbat]

Was it some of those Rolfaroos? Creepy things.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Rolf:
Charged this morning -
9 x indecent assault, 4 x making indecent pictures

The making pictures charges are a defense nightmare.

Yeah, it appears that there is no legal definition of 'indecent'. Instead:

The test to be applied in respect of indecent images of children is whether or not it is indecent. The word 'indecent' has not been defined by the PCA 1978, but case law has said that it is for the jury to decide based on the recognized standards of propriety.

From cps

'The recognised standards'. Recognised by whom?

 

[8ball]

Here's the handy sentencing guide. Key bit for your question would be the 'Taking, distributing, publishing or possession with a view to distribute or show' being the offence. So both and i would expect making them to be punished more severely. Looking at that in more detail it appears only level one will get you a community order. The rest are all jail.

By 'making' them, I was more thinking of how it affects someone who draws up sick mock-ups in photoshop etc. as opposed to taking pictures of actual sick acts. I suppose that's what they mean by 'pseudo photographs.

No reference to paintings, etchings, or verbal descriptions - not sure whether that's a comforting thing in that it is too rare to need a guideline....

 

[8ball]

'The recognised standards'. Recognised by whom?

The sentence would appear to imply the jury.