Bill Roach charged

Seemed like a bit of a fruit loop, claiming anything that happens to a person in this life is a result of their previous lives :/

That being said I can't help but think Bill is one of the innocent ones.
 
I imagine he'll still get labelled as a criminal, people will go the whole not guilty doesn't equate to innocent thing that seems so popular in these stories.
 
anticonscience said:
I imagine he'll still get labelled as a criminal, people will go the whole not guilty doesn't equate to innocent thing that seems so popular in these stories.
Click to expand...

Which is another thing which is so retarded about the media. Why the hell can you print accusations about someone without trial and verdict? Seems so unjust.


"He's a rapist...!" "No he's not, he was not guilty..." "Really? Didn't see that... rapist"


Deformation of character. Gah.
 
I'm trying to work out how this even got to court in the first place. Other then the accusers word what actual evidence was their that he actually committed a crime?
 
But to play the other side, which I was trying to do too; if the accuser was Dunc's daughter, who all those years ago was *allegedly* raped/whatever. Fast forward and there wasn't enough evidence to try the accused, he'd be innocent. Dunc would **** the bed.
 
randomshenans said:
But to play the other side, which I was trying to do too; if the accuser was Dunc's daughter, who all those years ago was *allegedly* raped/whatever. Fast forward and there wasn't enough evidence to try the accused, he'd be innocent. Dunc would **** the bed.
Click to expand...

Maybe at that point he should accept that his daughter was probably lying?

I hate this whole 'not guilty is not innocent' nonsense. It is in effect innocence, because you're innocent until you are proven guilty.
 
Thompson_NCL said:
Maybe at that point he should accept that his daughter was probably lying?

I hate this whole 'not guilty is not innocent' nonsense. It is in effect innocence, because you're innocent until you are proven guilty.
Click to expand...

The way I always try and justify it in my head is guilty and not guilty are legal terms where one just has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Innocent is a moral term. One that is absolute. What we'd like in a perfect world is the two to correlate perfectly.

Whilst in this case he's certainly not guilty, whether he is innocent is truly a different matter and not the conclusion reached by a court in most cases.

Oh, as for my opinion on whether he did or didn't do it, I really don't know. Many people are convinced he isn't the type of person to do something like that but when I judge someone I always hold in my head the phrase 'the greatest trick the devil ever performed was convincing the world he doesn't exist'.
 
Thompson_NCL said:
What relation does anyone in this thread have? Celebrities sometimes have opinions too.
Click to expand...

I just wondered if he had any relationship. Celebrities get grilled for sharing their opinions and therefore have to be more careful about expressing them. And with random saying he hit a nerve I was just wondering
 
People will do anything for a quick buck "He committed statutory rape 45 years ago blah blah blah"

Oh look, they've suddenly got loads of papers paying top dollar for the story or some hush money.

I mean Jimmy Saville, you sort of expect because he was always a dirty looking *******. If you saw him in a night club feeling up girls arses on the dance floor you wouldn't be the least bit suprised would you?

But it wouldn't at all suprise me if at least some of the allegations are total ********.

All seems a bit odd to me, "Oh lets claim a celebrity raped me nearly half a century ago" just seems like they're doing it because no one can really prove otherwise and they're under a public spotlight all the way. Were there abuses? Probably, but I can't imagine they left the girls traumatised, ultimately it was a different time.
 
Last edited:
Appears to be the right decision. The witness changed her mind half way through and I'm still confused as to how this going this far in first place. Yet another expensive high profile case than comes to nothing at the tax payers expense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom