http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28604456

after this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28564695

Not to me he doesn’t.

Reminds me of an old supposedly real newspaper headline: “Prostitutes appeal to Pope”

It probably isn’t real but its still funny

On topic, he was bound to appeal I guess, at 84 he’s going to do anything to not spend his last years incarcerated, regardless of what he’s done

He’s bound to appeal – he needs to get out. I heard he’d been asked by Redbull to paint some pictures at Playboy mansion… 8)

Rachel

Yes, apparently he was quite well regarded by some affluent types 😆

Whoops-a-daisy:

Let’s hope the Bunnies have the sense to keep their JERSEYs on

well with a bit of luck they will change his sentence to something more suitable eg 25yrs9 months, leave to appeal WTF?

Why do people, and the papers, think just because a person who is later found to have done bad stuff (in secret) is photographed with someone else, then that other person is suddenly guilty by association? And then they try to look smart by then posting up pics showing them together?

It’s something that jivehoneyjive likes to do. Two of the pics don’t even feature Rolf Harris, but in the conspiratorial world that doesn’t matter.

Do some research for yourselves:

Jimmy Savile + Rolf at Broadmoor

Savile, Mountbatten + Prince Charles

Most importantly, Jimmy Savile on Jersey… I’ll come back to that one once folk have taken a few more cheap shots 😉

Next?

I think you’re better looking at Elm guest house…

Harris’ sentence was based on the sentences for the crimes at the time they were committed, not on the current sentences available to the judiciary.

If that policy were to change it would be a bad day for British justice.

Let’s see what the rule of law says before we all go into print about this or any other case.

Let’s see what the rule of law says before we all go into print about this or any other case.

Let’s just ‘imagine’ that the rule of law and it’s enforcers had been shown to be somewhat lacking in pursuing some of these crimes, or perhaps even implicated to some extent… then what would you suggest?

If this is conspiracy involving ‘law enforcers’ what do you suggest we do jivehoneyjive ?

They seem rather well organised

Savile, Mountbatten + Prince Charles

That’s not Mountbatten mate, it’s Princess Diana.

Reminds me of a joke – two conspiracy theorists die and go to heaven. They meet god and ask him who killed JFK. God replies “Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone”. One ct looks at the other and says “this goes deeper than I’d imagined”.

Coat? Thanks…

You obviously don’t understand the shape-shifting capabilities of reptiloids greatape.

Have you ever seen the Queen’s lizard tail ? No of course not, that’s because she can take whatever shape she wants.

Good stuff DrJ, made me giggle 😆

I think you’re better looking at Elm guest house

Not a bad call, Dolphin Square too… and Lambeth, Islington, Kincora, Bryn Estyn, Medomsley etc etc

If this is conspiracy involving ‘law enforcers’ what do you suggest we do jivehoneyjive

Easy, same as you always do when fighting monsters: go for the head.

Which is why I keep harping on about Jersey…

Have two little boys come forward?

You obviously don’t understand the shape-shifting capabilities of reptiloids greatape.

Have you ever seen the Queen’s lizard tail ? No of course not, that’s because she can take whatever shape she wants.

Ah crap, I always forget about that. My mistake.

Have you ever seen the Queen’s lizard tail ? No of course not, that’s because she can take whatever shape she wants.

No she can’t she just hides it under her skirt. Ever seen the Queen naked? Or in a basque and some sexy lingerie? Ever wonder why not and what she’s hiding?

Easy, same as you always do when fighting monsters: go for the head.

Which is why I keep harping on about Jersey…

Can you be a little more specific ?

If the government, judiciary, police, etc, are all part of a pedophile conspiracy, then how do we go for the head ?

Let’s see what the rule of law says before we all go into print about this or any other case.
Let’s just ‘imagine’ that the rule of law and it’s enforcers had been shown to be somewhat lacking in pursuing some of these crimes, or perhaps even implicated to some extent… then what would you suggest?

Not the case at all. That’s just the way the law was at the time – not specific to Harris or anyone else.

Not the case at all. That’s just the way the law was at the time – not specific to Harris or anyone else.

Are you sure about that?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28597343

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28316874

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/10389041/How-far-did-police-go-to-protect-Jimmy-Savile.html

Was Rolf & Jimmy both reptiles too? coz they both look kinda slimey.

This one?

I think what JiveHoneyJive is missing is that Savile was Carol Thatchers real dad:

Which would go a long way to explaining all those Christmases spent at Chequers!

Cliff Richard is next

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/not-cliff