Cliff Richard - Sexual Abuse Claims
- Thread starter Sliver
- Start date
What is really scary is allegations can be made about something that happened 30 odd years ago. I am sixty and I am sure I got up to some naughty stuff in my time. Not with children unless you include playing a rather risqué version of mummies and daddies when I myself was but a child.
Do you think time should be a factor for prosecution ? i.e. should there be a cut off point ? Just asking as that is what you seem to imply, or maybe I am not understanding your point.
What an utterly bizarre opinion to hold and willfully share with the Internet, given the context. This isn't about shoplifting pick and mix from Woolworths.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Did you watch life on mars or ashes to ashes?
How Gene Hunt treated the women?
That was commonplace, I doubt there isn't a woman didn't get groped or her bottom spanked or patted during the 70s.
In theory this is all historical abuse.
On a completely different scale from Saville, but like everything it is on the spectrum.
At which stage do you draw a line at which you reject it as a historical complaint?
When it crosses the line of legality. You cannot retrospectively apply sexual harassment laws that did not exist when the incident occurred, you can however enforce the laws that were in place at the time. There is no statute of limitations on sexual abuse. This is why those who have received sentences for their transgressions have not been subject to the severity of punishment enforced for abuses that occur today.
As you say, on a completely different scale to Savile and not even the same ****ing sport, let alone scale or ball park, so why even bring it up?
Lawyers and MPs criticise televised raid on singer's home as police defend.
Seems like the Police have changed their tune on this.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ichards-home-which-police-defend-9673123.html
Seems like the Police have changed their tune on this.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ichards-home-which-police-defend-9673123.html
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2007
- Posts
- 10,607
- Location
- Sussex, UK
Is Sir Cliff Richard innocent? What will I do for a Christmas calendar now :/
So...as far as I can tell some dude has basically said that in the 70's Sir Cliff gave him a little bit of a personal tickle.
This has entitled the police to announce to the world (via the press) that they think he's some sort of sexual deviant and raid his property.
Does this mean that I can say decades a go some dude I have a grudge against poked me in my nether regions and turn his life upside down?
This has entitled the police to announce to the world (via the press) that they think he's some sort of sexual deviant and raid his property.
Does this mean that I can say decades a go some dude I have a grudge against poked me in my nether regions and turn his life upside down?
time in what? :chuckle:
Your flippant regard to sexual abuse is rather worrying
And yes of course, if someone has broken the law and ''gave him a little bit of a personal tickle''
then absolutely they should be investigated!The amount of time that has passed is utterly irrelevant and provided the crimes can be proven beyond a reason of doubt then personally I think they should be punished with the fullest extent of the law, celebrity or otherwise!!!
From the articles I have read the individual who is making the initial accusation against cliff contacted the police during the whole Jimmy Savile revelations
Last edited:
Your flippant regard to sexual abuse is rather worrying
And yes of course, if someone has broken the law and ''gave him a little bit of a personal tickle''
The amount of time that has passed is utterly irrelevant and provided the crimes can be proven beyond a reason of doubt then personally I think they should be punished with the fullest extent of the law, celebrity or otherwise!!!
From the articles I have read the individual who is making the initial accusation against cliff contacted the police during the whole Jimmy Savile revelations
Completely missing the point. What we have is simply one persons statement completely ruining someone else's life.
A single statement that could be completely unfounded.
The guy could harbour a grudge. Could be mentally ill. Could just crave attention. Could just want some £.
All this person has to do is say at some point in the past he was abused. That's it. Life for accused ruined.
I agree, they should investigate the allegation to the point of evidence, then steam in with all guns blazing if absolutely necessary. Until then leave him alone, he's not going to run anywhere.
The fact of the matter is ... we don't know the facts.
Yes, superficially it seems rather kneejerk and burn-the-witch-esque, but there must be more than just one person and supposed wild claims to validate this.
Regarding claims and people's lives being ruined - try being a male teacher in a socially-deprived area school. The staff there are suspended almost yearly for a week-to-a-month by claims made by 14-16yr old savvy streetwise girls who either don't like the teacher/homework he sets/the threat of finishing school and having to earn money. I worked in such a school as a teaching assistant 7yrs ago, and teachers were always coaxed to come into rooms by themselves by the pupils where all accusations were made. After that, staff were made to go around in pairs at all times in fear of allegations.