Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

SarahBell

Difference?

Recommended Posts

Wyman, who was 52 at the time, reportedly began dating Smith when she was 14. In recent years, as the Jimmy Savile scandal unfolded, he approached police to ask whether they wanted to question him about their relationship.
"I went to the police and I went to the public prosecutor and said, 'Do you want to talk to me? Do you want to meet up with me, or anything like that?' and I got a message back, 'No,'" he said. "I was totally open about it."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35752857

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a rock star, and they're still cool. And cool guys are allowed to bang teenage groupies. And in the years since, the women who were teenage groupies never seem to feel they were taken advantage of.

DJ's aren't cool, they're dirty old men. And if you had any kind of contact with someone who is now a wrinkly old DJ, they must have taken advantage of you.

How else can you explain that the demographic who will statistically have probably have slept with the most young women, rock stars, don't seem to have had any women complain about being abused?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eight

I know it's irrelevant to this thread, but from your link, can anybody explain the weird omnipresence of Bob Geldof?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a rock star, and they're still cool. And cool guys are allowed to bang teenage groupies. And in the years since, the women who were teenage groupies never seem to feel they were taken advantage of.

DJ's aren't cool, they're dirty old men. And if you had any kind of contact with someone who is now a wrinkly old DJ, they must have taken advantage of you.

How else can you explain that the demographic who will statistically have probably have slept with the most young women, rock stars, don't seem to have had any women complain about being abused?

Hang on, the DJs accused of this stuff weren't dirty old men back in the 60s and 70s when some of these things allegedly happened - they were probably younger than you are now.

Also, back in those days DJs were considered idols in their way and very much part of the music scene. There were very few radio stations and the men who got to be DJs on them were considered like superstars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it's irrelevant to this thread, but from your link, can anybody explain the weird omnipresence of Bob Geldof?

Yes. Lefties love tax evaders as long as they 'think of the children'. Not in a pervy way, obviously. Unless they are left wing filmmakers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on, the DJs accused of this stuff weren't dirty old men back in the 60s and 70s when some of these things allegedly happened - they were probably younger than you are now.

Also, back in those days DJs were considered idols in their way and very much part of the music scene. There were very few radio stations and the men who got to be DJs on them were considered like superstars.

This is a really important point, but so little is said about it.

In these historical cases I'd like ages of the alleged perpetrator at the time (not just age now and year of offence, leaving the subtraction to me - make it really obvious). And I'd like photos of the celebrity at the time, not now (so I could understand the situation). I'd also like some comments on social norms (like interviews / comments from women (or men) saying about what sort of behaviour you'd get going to the pub, or nightclub, or normal office).

As an example, in the Rolf case he was done for pinching a waitresses bum (amongst other things, which are more serious allegations). She was 16 or 17, working as a waitress. He was about 48. It was 1978. Now that is dirty-old-man territory. But she wasn't a child, and I'd guess it was an occupational risk for any waitress in 1978. Not saying that it is fine etc - but you can't convict today based on social norms from 40 years ago.

On the other hand Talbot-is-a-weatherman was done for mucking about with boys in '75. They were 14-17, he was 25. Surely he's not a dirty old man - he's younger than Adam Johnson with the boys about the same age as that girl. The fact that it is homoerotic shouldn't really come into it (or should it?). If the boys were a couple of years older that would be okay? But on the other hand, I'd also suggest that 25 year old men mucking about with 15 year old boys wasn't considered a social norm at that time (18yr with 15yr would have been fairly common, depending on the school). Now, he's definitely guilty, but it is the dreadful abuse of trust in this case which marks him out as being bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the basic difference that he married her? You got the impression in the Adam Johnson case that if he had ditched his existing girlfriend and taken up with the 15 year old, and stayed with her, then whilst it would have been open knowledge nothing would have been done.

What the police and CPS require is somebody to stand up as a victim in the witness box, as long as Mandy Smith doesn't want to do this then they have no chance of a successful prosecution based purely upon "everybody knows".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the basic difference that he married her? You got the impression in the Adam Johnson case that if he had ditched his existing girlfriend and taken up with the 15 year old, and stayed with her, then whilst it would have been open knowledge nothing would have been done.

What the police and CPS require is somebody to stand up as a victim in the witness box, as long as Mandy Smith doesn't want to do this then they have no chance of a successful prosecution based purely upon "everybody knows".

The law (in the UK) doesn't require the victim to agree to the prosecution. If there is overwhelming evidence out there (such as diaries, statements in books, recordings of the people saying they did it on TV) then they can prosecute. Should they prosecute though? I guess the approach currently is 'does justice deserve to be given' or 'is it in the public interest'. It seems to be that the approach taken is if the 'victim' is in agreement. But they (CPS) doesn't need that to prosecute.

As a related aside on this matter - according to the law that sent down Johnson, every single teen pregnancy where there is a birth at full term before 16 and 3/4 is evidence of a crime of sex with a minor (which is without informed consent, therefore rape), and there will be overwhelming DNA evidence of the perpetrator. Furthermore, if the boy concerned was under 16 then the girl is also guilty of the same offence. Should they prosecute? Of course not - but it is only because it isn't in the public interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CPS and their fellow travelers the Met have been prepared to push prosecutions against older DJs (Paul Gambacinni, Dave Lee Travis, Neil Fox) based upon the flimsiest of evidence of the most trivial things.

I don't see how any of that is in the public interest; they're being maverick and destroying lives without remotely serving justice.

Time to fundamentally change their remit and also make them accountable for their failures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CPS and their fellow travelers the Met have been prepared to push prosecutions against older DJs (Paul Gambacinni, Dave Lee Travis, Neil Fox) based upon the flimsiest of evidence of the most trivial things.

I don't see how any of that is in the public interest; they're being maverick and destroying lives without remotely serving justice.

Time to fundamentally change their remit and also make them accountable for their failures.

I'd agree with that. It is even possible that the 'public' thinks that it is in the public interest, but they need to be educated - examples might help people...

Eg, What would people think if they could lose their driving license for drink driving, based on verbal evidence from bar-staff and others of drink driving in the 60s. It is socially unacceptable now, but commonplace then.

I'd say the first test should be 'was it a socially unacceptable behaviour when it was committed' - if the answer is no then it shouldn't proceed. Some of the offences are troublesome, but a bit of groping in the 1970s wasn't a sexual assault at the time (again - it might be reprehensible, but it wasn't a crime in the eyes of either party at the time).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on, the DJs accused of this stuff weren't dirty old men back in the 60s and 70s when some of these things allegedly happened - they were probably younger than you are now.

Also, back in those days DJs were considered idols in their way and very much part of the music scene. There were very few radio stations and the men who got to be DJs on them were considered like superstars.

I know, that's my point.

They weren't dirty old men back then, but now they are for the most part considered 'uncool' old codgers, and you wouldn't want to admit to sleeping with one of them years ago.

Whereas 60 and 70 something rock stars are still cool, so there is no shame, perhaps even a bit of pride and excitement, about reminiscing about your wild younger days when you were banged by <insert rock guitar god here>.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, that's my point.

They weren't dirty old men back then, but now they are for the most part considered 'uncool' old codgers, and you wouldn't want to admit to sleeping with one of them years ago.

Whereas 60 and 70 something rock stars are still cool, so there is no shame, perhaps even a bit of pride and excitement, about reminiscing about your wild younger days when you were banged by <insert rock guitar god here>.

Good point. Smashie & Nicey probably haven't helped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point. Smashie & Nicey probably haven't helped.

That's exactly it. Old DJ's are thought of as 'smashy and nicey's'.

Whereas rock stars....now I'm not for one minute suggesting Jimmy Page has ever done anything wrong, I'm sure he hasn't. But here's his girlfriend:

B7EVL8qCQAAj1aK.jpg

You think a 71 year old DJ is going to be able to pull a girl like that?

Jimmy Page is still idolized by several generations of music fans and guitarists. These old DJ's are not adored in the same way. They could well have been when the events that they are being prosecuted for happened, but what seems to matter in the eye of the public (and dare I say, maybe even some accusers), is how they are viewed today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point. Smashie & Nicey probably haven't helped.

Actually the perception shift cuased by those charcates and particularly their End of an Era show was probably the major cause for all these prosecutions after Saville.

Up to then we'd all been privately thinking what annoying talentless twunts they were and were irked that they'd been dominating the airwaves for so long with so little ability.

Then along come Smashie and Nicey and we realise that everybody else has been thinking exactly the same and the public view of them turns 180 degrees.

Then the girl who for twenty years has been scoring cool points (or thinks she has) by saying that she was kissed by <insert DJ name here> realises that everybody's probably been laughing about her when she wasn't there and runs to a solicitor to get "that evil creep" banged up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whereas rock stars....now I'm not for one minute suggesting Jimmy Page has ever done anything wrong, I'm sure he hasn't. But here's his girlfriend:

Deleted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if you are being serious or just completely ignorant about his past, with particular reference to Lori Maddox.

I think we all know but Joe's following the forum rule: don't go accusing people who have not been brought to court or during court cases or the thread gets deleted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all know but Joe's following the forum rule: don't go accusing people who have not been brought to court or during court cases or the thread gets deleted.

Fair enough. I suggest you delete the link to my comment then.

Although, and this really isn't me getting defensive, the entire thread is an accusation and mentions the name of a two men who have never been to court in relation to the activities mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I suggest you delete the link to my comment then.

Although, and this really isn't me getting defensive, the entire thread is an accusation and mentions the name of a two men who have never been to court in relation to the activities mentioned.

I'm not policing it, more saying why some people aren't saying as much as they know.

Link deleted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all know but Joe's following the forum rule: don't go accusing people who have not been brought to court or during court cases or the thread gets deleted.

Spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just googled Lori Maddox. That was interesting reading.

Rock stars are allowed to bang 15 year olds, and pass the hottest ones among themselves, simply because these are the 'alpha males', the most desirable men on earth.

Whereas if you're Joe average now, you can be given a hard time for daring to look at a woman, or for sitting with your legs too far open on public transport.

Know your place gentlemen, and don't be getting ideas above your station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a rock star, and they're still cool. And cool guys are allowed to bang teenage groupies. And in the years since, the women who were teenage groupies never seem to feel they were taken advantage of.

DJ's aren't cool, they're dirty old men. And if you had any kind of contact with someone who is now a wrinkly old DJ, they must have taken advantage of you.

How else can you explain that the demographic who will statistically have probably have slept with the most young women, rock stars, don't seem to have had any women complain about being abused?

I think this is a good point. I believe Sir Jimmy Saville himself even admitted something along the lines of 'they don't really want me, they want the people who make the records I play'. Doing it with a DJ was probably the equivalent of doing it with a fat beardy stage crew roadie in the hope that he'd let you go to the backstage party with the one and only Showaddywaddy. I would imagine there was a fair amount of remorse afterwards with women who went along with all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although, and this really isn't me getting defensive, the entire thread is an accusation and mentions the name of a two men who have never been to court in relation to the activities mentioned.

Smashie and Nicey??? :o

Oh well, I suppose it had to happen eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   47 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.