[Closed] Please, no, not Rolf Harris?

puts a totally new slant on "can you tell what it is yet?"

Was it two little boys?

Im jake the peg, diddleiddle-um, with the extra leg didliddle-um....

As that article points out, it's been all over the social media sites for the past 3 weeks or so

All the famous peeps from my childhood seem to be sex pests of varying degrees. Please not John Noakes.

Get down Shep!

I'd have thought he was more into marsupial bondage, sport.

Jeebus.
At least we should be safe with fingerbob and nosey bonk.

Umm, is anybody thinking it was the horse that made the complaint?

As that article points out, it's been all over the social media sites for the past 3 weeks or so

All the article points out is that he's been named; there's no timescale mentioned, and the quote from Brand would suggest that it's after the news got out.

Shame. I hope it's a mis-hit, he always seemed like one of the good guys.

Umm, is anybody thinking it was the horse that made the complaint?

Yeah, juxtaposed with the headline, I laughed.

timmy mallet let his giant hammer flop onto my head when i was a young boy.

When will someone realise that Bruce Forsyth drinks the blood of virgins to stay alive?

He told me that I'd be big down under 🙁

He's not even been charged with anything. Please don't make opinion about someone until it has been proved they did it.

Rachel

I heard about this months ago

he always seemed like one of the good guys.

No he didn't, he was the main act at the end of university ball one year (back in 1992 or so), I remember on the girls who was helping out running the event complaining that he was a real creep...

Rolf Harris CANNOT be guilty, the whole fabric of society would fall apart

One 'alleged' female victim? If you can get through life without being a celebrity and not causing one female to feel she is a victim you'll be doing well.

An 83 yr old guy, after all this time, who is conducting this enquiry? [url= http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/4885876/How-can-they-let-G4S-loose-on-child-sex-cases.html ]G4S[/url]

This hit the news before Christmas - apparently, he was admitted to the priory around the same time as the initial allegations. Sad, but in light of the saville affair, etc, not that much of a surprise.

He once painted the queen for 4 months! He milked that one. I reckon I could gloss her head to toe in a couple of hours.

What I don't get is that, assuming the alleged offence took place many years ago (oike many of these seem to have), isn't just a case of one person's word against another's? And also, how is someone supposed to have a detailed (or, indeed, any) memory of what may or may not happened, and therefore mount a reasonable defence?

A (fictional!) example:

Copper - Mr Harris, this lady says you put your hand up her skirt in the dressing room of the Blackpool Working Men's Club in December 1973

Rolf Harris - I didn't do that

Copper - Well, what happened then?

Rolf Harris - I've no idea, it was 40 years ago, I couldn't even tell you if I was at the Blackpool Working Men's club in 1973. I do know I've never put my hand up a woman's skirt who didn't want me to.

G4S a tabloid non-story. They are providing civilian investigators, so thank Winsor Report and current government for the cuts that make that necessary. The criteria for recruitment into the role mean only retired detectives with relevant experience are getting employed. Oh the ironing.

Harris was named on the net months ago, all sorts of conspiracy theories as to why he wasn't named when so many others were.

What a shame, hope it's not true, Rolf Harris is awesome.

No he didn't, he was the main act at the end of university ball one year (back in 1992 or so), I remember on the girls who was helping out running the event complaining that he was a real creep...

Thats enough for me - BURN HIM!!!

P.S God I hate the tabloids. Talk about reporting what didn't happen. Police "raided" his house, no they didn't, they popped around and he wasn't there. He wasn't arrested, he went into talk to them about the supposed allegation.

Tossers.

Fingers crossed it is because he pinched a girls bum in the 60s while on lsd.
The radio won't be the same without 2 little boys.

As I said above, this is not exactly breaking news. Yes it's sad, but you can't pick and choose who you want to be guilty or innocent. Wait and see what happens - have the media or police released details about what he's actually supposed to have done?

One of the problems is that given the shadow of the Jimmy Saville investigation there is almost an assumption that anyone accused of sexual offences is part of the same circle of lovey-nonces .Some like Dave Lee Travis are accused of relatively minor sexual intrusions against adult females at social gatherings. I'm not minimising but I think we need to know what each one is accused of and deal with on it's merits before chop their billabongs off

I wonder if anyone is going to mention Barry Sheene?

He was notorious for "satisfying" his groupies, and odds on an underage one will have slipped in there. (I'm not saying he was actively seeking young ones).

I suspect it was the same for Rolf Harris and many other celebrities of that period. It wasn't called the sexual revolution for nothing.

I'm not minimising but I think we need to know what each one is accused of and deal with on it's merits before chop their billabongs off

How very tedious. Can't we just draw celebrity names from a hat, draw a random criminal act from another hat, put the two together and then burn the 'lucky' celebrity at the stake. After all that we can then thoroughly investigate the allegation and charge the hat with making it all up if necessary.

What was I thinking of ?

[i]the queen for 4 months! He milked that one.[/i]

While immensely distasteful, I'm sure this isn't actually illegal.

epicyclo - Member
I wonder if anyone is going to mention Barry Sheene?

He was notorious for "satisfying" his groupies, and odds on an underage one will have slipped in there. (I'm not saying he was actively seeking young ones).

I suspect it was the same for Rolf Harris and many other celebrities of that period. It wasn't called the sexual revolution for nothing.

Exactly and what about Mick Jagger & the Stones, purl ease don't try and tell me everyone of their 'conquests' was of legal age, not to mention the pre-pubescent girl on the cover of that album..

Different times, different values, back then they didn't even mind men and their sons spending a life digging horrible black stuff out of the ground until that kind lady thatcher came along and stopped it all..

He signed my copy of the Rolf Harris Songbook with one of his cartoons, I'll have to scan it and post it up. I could also tell you my wife's experience of the signing but the mods would delete it and send me a your a naughty boy e-mail you can't go saying things like that.

The line "Do you know what it is yet?" will never be the same.

In these cases we should also be mindful of whether the accusations concern:

A: children (biological definition: a boy or girl between birth and physical maturity.). According to the NHS physical maturity is reached on average between 12 and 18 for girls, 15 to 20 for boys.

or

B: physically mature people under the age of consent in the UK.

Whole different matter. A would make the accused a paedophile. B would merely indicate a lack of respect for the law.

Interesting to note that people may still be paedophiles by definition for fancying boys over the age of consent.

Of course all of this is way too complicated for those of the 'burn 'em' or 'hang 'em high' mentality. Can't have mere pesky facts ruining a good lynching.

It seems I've made a false accusation about the stones and their album cover, my apologies, it did happen and during that period may have raised eyebrows, but nowhere near the moral hysteria we get today.

Google Blind Faith but don't if you have sensibilities concerning pre pubescent girls holding phallic symbols, a bit off topic, but Rolf Harris goes back this far, lived and performed during this era and certainly wasn't regarded back then as the sort of scuzzy type that would act that way.

A lot of the alleged crimes do seem to be from years and years ago. It does strike me that maybe what many people felt was acceptable then, is no longer felt to be acceptable - so society's changing values is something to bear in mind.
+ if they were drunk/on drugs and underage groupies were throwing themselves at them, I'm not sure this is the same as proactively and deliberately targeting vulnerable children.

The story in Crossfire Hurricane about rivers of girls' urine streaming down the aisles shows you how more restrained things are now...

Different times, different values, back then they didn't even mind men and their sons spending a life digging horrible black stuff out of the ground until that kind lady thatcher came along and stopped it all.

This some kind of new variant on Godwin's Law?

No suprise, he make half a career out of heavy rhythmic breathing

I always thought that 'Tie me kangaroo down' had a slightly suspicious air...

atlaz - Member

This some kind of new variant on Godwin's Law?

We could call it Goodmans Law.. 😉

"I grew up in the belief that sex
was dirty. It was spoken of only
behind the boy's lavatory at school
or written with chalk on a wall.

"I can remember getting a hiding
from my mother when I was about
four for doing a super drawing
of a man with no clothes on -
he was standing there absolutely
naked and urinating - and my
mother didn't like it.

"When I was ten or 11 my mother
decided I should see her naked
to let me know it was all natural
and everything - and we had baths
together. But it was too late by
then. It just used to embarrass me.

"Then my mum brought me a book about
what any young boy should know and
she stayed in the room while I tried
to read it, but I was just too
embarrassed and couldn't wait
to get out of that room."

- Rolf Harris, TV Times, c1974

G4S a tabloid non-story. They are providing civilian investigators, so thank Winsor Report and current government for the cuts that make that necessary. The criteria for recruitment into the role mean only retired detectives with relevant experience are getting employed. Oh the ironing.

Not ironic at all (in the definitive sense of the word, it's not an unexpected event).

Experienced person quits, and becomes a consultant. The original compnay benefits by being able to call on that experience on a day (or hourly, weekly, monthly) rate, without the costs of having to pay them 48 weeks a year, or provide a pension, HR, notice periods, or if they work from home/other office, a desk/phone/cleaner/PC, ICT suppourt etc. The consultant benefits by getting more money (but has to cover their own overheads), gets to chose who he works for and what projects, and gets as much (unpaid) holliday as they like.