GUILTY UK - Rolf Harris for molesting underage girls, child *advertiser censored*, 2013

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

sar2them1984 said:
Well I believe he has also been charged with making indecent images of children - not so easy to fabricate evidence for that charge. Hence my earlier comment.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-indecent-assault-indecent-images-child.html

Why hasn't he been charged/I vestifates by Australian police? Why wasn't Jimmy Saville or Ian Watkins? Police were well aware of their "indiscretions" yet did nothing at the time

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

putting Saville and Watkins in the same basket as Rolf is appalling.

For a start neither committed crimes in Australia, nor were their victims Australian.

Rolf had a career working with children long before he went to the Uk.

Where are all his earlier victims? We all know pedophiles are prolific.

There are still no other "victims" apart from the ones who independantly contacted the media which automatically discredits them imo.
 
I wasn't attempting to put them in the same basker in that sense, I was merely stating that very recently we have seen examples of high profile people who have beem caught doing wrong and it has emerged the LE have been tipped off previously and not acted upon it. Why? I can't answer that but its proof that it does happen.

I'm not going to get into a debate as to whether what he's being accused of is true or not. You've obviously got your own ideas but just to point out that not only is your statement that the "victims" all independently contacted the media incorrect; regardless of that he had been charged with making (not downloading or possessing) indecent photographs as recently as 2012. Pretty hard for a "victim" to fabricate that.

Don't get me wrong - I do not mean to have a dig at you personally it just annoys me that whenever there is an historic abuse case Involving celebrities that the victims are the ones who people turn on. Why didn't theu mention something before? They're only doing it for the money/fame/attention.

Well, thats not always the case - many people who have been abused by ordinary, non celebrity people do not mention or report it for many years and yet that is acceptable however when the accused is a celebrity any delay is deemed as a sign of fabrication on the victims part. Why is that?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
 
As a former child victim of several molesters, who -never- spoke up (I can't imagine doing so, the very thought of it is stressful..) I can totally understand the delay, and why when there's multiple victims it's like a snowball rolling - one reports, and gives the others courage. That is understandable -- and that's not what bothers me about the two Aussie women.

The images and the English woman are what will decide this case for me. 'Making' images can also equal 'downloading', somehow, and having a picture of your grandkids in the bath counts too, if they are desperate to make a charge stick. Not ALL pedos are prolific, but I think four images is a tiny number compared to most caught pedos, who tend to have much larger 'collections'. It suggests to me either a 'trophy' picture set from one or two victims -- or accidental d/l's that might never have been viewed at all by anyone, if it wasn't for the charges and the police raid. I think there's a lot of innocent folks out there with pictures on their computers that could well look damning, if such a charge was made against them - including me!

The English girl may well be a victim, as well the child in the images, however.. If they are, then I hope Rolf's prosecuted and jailed, like any other sex offender.

If it turns out he's not guilty, though - how will anyone ever make up for the damage done? How? I truly believe ALL cases like this should remain out of the media, until the courts have decided guilt or innocence. Even if it's maddening for sleuthers (as it is here in Aus, where we do have media bans)!
 
Ausgirl said:
As a former child victim of several molesters, who -never- spoke up (I can't imagine doing so, the very thought of it is stressful..) I can totally understand the delay, and why when there's multiple victims it's like a snowball rolling - one reports, and gives the others courage. That is understandable -- and that's not what bothers me about the two Aussie women.

The images and the English woman are what will decide this case for me. 'Making' images can also equal 'downloading', somehow, and having a picture of your grandkids in the bath counts too, if they are desperate to make a charge stick. Not ALL pedos are prolific, but I think four images is a tiny number compared to most caught pedos, who tend to have much larger 'collections'. It suggests to me either a 'trophy' picture set from one or two victims -- or accidental d/l's that might never have been viewed at all by anyone, if it wasn't for the charges and the police raid. I think there's a lot of innocent folks out there with pictures on their computers that could well look damning, if such a charge was made against them - including me!

The English girl may well be a victim, as well the child in the images, however.. If they are, then I hope Rolf's prosecuted and jailed, like any other sex offender.

If it turns out he's not guilty, though - how will anyone ever make up for the damage done? How? I truly believe ALL cases like this should remain out of the media, until the courts have decided guilt or innocence. Even if it's maddening for sleuthers (as it is here in Aus, where we do have media bans)!
Click to expand...

I can totally understand. I was abused as a child and never reported it until years later when anither family member revealed that they too had been abused.

I do think that the media bans should be extended to the accused, that way if they are found innocent then no harm is done.

What grates on me is that people assume victims are liars just because they are alleging historic abuse by a celebrity

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
 
I agree, sar. I am very glad the women who were child victims are actually seeing some justice. Good on 'em for speaking up, and I dare say most are genuine in their allegations. It takes a special kind of nutjob to lie about something like that, but since those people unfortunately do exist I do think that media restrictions would help the falsely accused stay safe, and minimise the damage done to the innocent -- which I think is incredibly under-rated in general. Mud sticks, and that kind of mud can stick forever. Nothing can repair damage to a reputation or career, after something like that.

Why I am skeptical about the Aussies has -nothing- to do with time. But I've already said my reasons so won't repeat 'em.

The whole Yewtree thing seems to have gone very quiet of late.
 
Well said Ausgirl. And I agree the Yewtree case seems to have gone remarkably quiet

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
 
sar2them1984 said:
I can totally understand. I was abused as a child and never reported it until years later when anither family member revealed that they too had been abused.

I do think that the media bans should be extended to the accused, that way if they are found innocent then no harm is done.

What grates on me is that people assume victims are liars just because they are alleging historic abuse by a celebrity

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

And it grates on me when a national treasure is lumped in with the scum of the earth just because a fame monger said so.

We are supposed to be SLEUTHS....to think logically and weigh up evidence.

Where is the evidence?????

Making Indecent Images is not related to groping girls in hallways...so LE haven't charged him with anything resulting from these allegations.

Until they do this just looks like a grab for cash.

Eta we only know about these allegations because the "victim" went to the media.

If someone commits a crime against me, especially a historic one, I would sit tight until LE had completed their investigation. To do otherwise is risking any prosecution that may be made. No doubt LE counsels victims to do the same...so why sell it to the media before charges are even laid?
 
Imagine turning on the telly one day to see the neighbor girl from 30 years ago telling the nation about how your much loved dad abused her once in a hallway decades ago.

No charges have been made but she's telling the world anyway.

Whose rights are more important, assuming the girl has been an alcoholic drug addict with delusional personality disorder who has been in and out of institutions her entire life?

Hers to slander someone, or his as the target for a crazy person who wants cash and fame?
 
To be fair, we have seen -nothing- of the English woman's accusations. For all we know, she could well be telling the truth. I have seen enough of the Aussie accuser and the Aussie 'witness' to be fairly confident in saying they're dubious at best. But we've seen nothing of the English one, so we cannot comment on her with any clarity at all.

And to be fair, people with drug and mental issues have --every right-- to speak up, if they are telling the truth. Her rights, victim or not, are every bit as important as Rolf's, or anyone else's. What you're not considering here is that trauma can lead to mental illness and drug use. And being groped 30 years ago MIGHT indeed have been enough to send this woman on a downward spiral of drug use and depression for the rest of her life, who knows? I think she's full of it, but that's not to say ALL people with those issues are automatically on the make for cash, you know???

Also, to be fair, while there's only four images and that looks odd for a pedo... we don't know what those images actually are. If they're explicitly pornographic, well fair call, innit, and the number won't matter a jot.

What grates on me hard here, though, is what a circus has been made of Yewtree and its targets, and the kneejerk reactions of the entertainment industry -- and the bloody Queen -- in distancing themselves from Rolf months prior to his case going to court.

Portraits "lost", galleries taking pictures down, contracts cancelled, a lifetime's career up in smoke. And what IF he's innocent? Too bloody bad, eh.

I'm reminded of a certain shady individual over here, who is on weapons and child sex charges currently, and whose wife 'mysteriously' vanished. No-one's allowed to discuss his cases in the media, at all. We can't connect him to the charges by name here. Despite that it's incredibly -obvious- he is likely to be found guilty of all charges laid (and killed his wife). But IF on the off chance he IS innocent of all charges, his particular crapstorm has a good chance of going away, because it's not plastered all over the media and internet in every country with functioning electrical cables. Frustrating as hell, from a sleuther's perspective, but it makes good sense in the bigger picture.

But Rolf's a pedo, the end -- months before his trial -- because the Brits love a bit of drama with their cornflakes in the morning.
 
SapphireSteel said:
putting Saville and Watkins in the same basket as Rolf is appalling.

For a start neither committed crimes in Australia, nor were their victims Australian.

Rolf had a career working with children long before he went to the Uk.

Where are all his earlier victims? We all know pedophiles are prolific.

There are still no other "victims" apart from the ones who independantly contacted the media which automatically discredits them imo.
Click to expand...

I think this really is a case that have people siding one way or the other. Nothing wrong with that.

I don't care what nationality the accused or the victims are, nor what country the crime was committed in. Doesn't mean anything in the context of sexual assault. Not all pedophiles are prolific. Some will be able to control their urges, but give in to them, sometimes many years apart. There is nothing that suggests pedophiles will be committing crimes willy nilly. It all comes down to their perception of their abusing (some will think it is wrong, others won't have any remorse), stressors in their life (they may seek gratification as distraction), opportunity, self-control, etc.

The existence of victims of any pedophile is in no way correlated to the number that come forward. This is evident across all forms of sexual assault. A large proportion of victims will NEVER speak up - for a variety of reasons. Lack of reporting does not equal lack of existence.

And lastly, a delay between an assault and reporting can be due to a number of reasons. One very significant one is often it takes this long for a victim to find the strength to speak up. Often it is part of ongoing therapy and acceptance that the assault occurred. It could also do with the amount of social support a victim has, the confidence to speak up if others have also (which often happens in high profile cases - they aren't all liars - some just feel safer in numbers), or the desire to confront their attacker before they die.
 
Good post, SW. However..

Strangeworld said:
The existence of victims of any pedophile is in no way correlated to the number that come forward.
Click to expand...

.. I think the problem when the accused are very famous and/or rich is that this can also work inversely, ie, the rich and famous are much more likely to be falsely accused when there's a huge media witchhunt in the papers, so there could be many more 'victims' than there actually were, if any. This has been the case already, with some accused in the Yewtree operation who are now vindicated (and suing their accusers).

But yeah, I must agree - I don't think sweeping generalisations on the nature of child molesters is very helpful in the sense of what one particular person would or wouldn't do, even though there's aspects here I find don't quite gel with my own perceptions and understandings.
 
Like I said, show me the evidence.

Its significant Rolf has pleaded Not Guilty and is putting himself through the public ordeal of a trial.

The charges are relatively minor and at his advanced age and otherwise spotless reputation combined with the UK sentencing laws would probably ensure any punishment would be mild - fines he can afford, probation he is too old to breach.

His NOT GUILTY plea tells me he us either -

A nasty old coot who doesn't give a toss about his crimes

Or

Innocent.

As I said before I met Rolf as a stupid vulnerable young girl and he was a total gentleman. FWIW it was 3am and I had been drinking. Rolf was strolling down the street alone carrying his duty free bags and suffering a shocking case of jet lag. I adored him since childhood and would've gone anywhere with him -he was more concerned with getting me into a taxi.

Hardly the behaviour of a predator...and untold thousands of Aussies agree with me apparently (no allegations here where he was swim Coach for kids!)

Of course moo. But it is significant he's chosen a trial.
 
It looks like the trial proper will be getting underway now. The jury were sworn in earlier this week and the prosecution will outline their case today.

Harris has been accompanied by his wife and daughter each day.

After seeing the effect Yewtree's drawn out investigation has had on Freddie Starr this week, I can only hope they have real evidence against Harris. But I also hope he's innocent if only because I have very fond memories of watching his art shows as a kid.
 
Pisces Cloud said:
One of the alleged victims was his daughter's friend.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27340134
Click to expand...

Yeah, how's that hey?

Rolf Harris trial: A ‘Jekyl and Hyde’ character who used fame to groom girls

http://www.news.com.au/world/rolf-h...e-to-groom-girls/story-fndir2ev-1226912380972

This case reminds me of the Robert Hughes one, look it's very sad that an icon has been discovered to be like this by most so late in life, but really with the amount of detail, evidence and accusers there is no need to assume they are all lying, doesn't this just re-victimise them, and make people who have been abused even more wary about coming forward .. I was abused as a kid by an older in-law and I never came forward EVER, my sister told my mum once (which broke the rule we had together to 'never tell') and mum accused her of lying, then went into denial as if she never heard it, so if anyone wonders why abuse victims don't speak up, in reality they should ask themselves why any come forward at all! It makes me mad when they are accused of wanting cash and fame, really?? Who on earth would want to make something as shameful (and yes, to the victim it does feel SHAMEFUL) public? That's ridiculous. It's only when victims are older they accept the truth and maybe decide to make the truth public. I'm sad that this has come out too, I would like very much for this not to be part of the Rolf Harris story, but if it's the truth, it needs to be told.
 
There's nothing new here.
How did Elvis & Pricilla dodge the bullet?

Never lonesome: The King lapped up attention from his young female fans
'He was fascinated with the idea of real young teenage girls,' said Lamar Fike, a former member of his entourage. 'It scared the hell out of all of us.'
Most famously there was his future wife, Priscilla Beaulieu, who was just 14 - ten years his junior - when they met in September 1959. Although sexual from the start, their relationship was portrayed as a sweet and innocent triumph of love across the age divide. In fact, it was just one of Presley's many unsettling liaisons with minors in the years following his rise to fame.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...o-able-form-relationships-virginal-girls.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 114 more.
Total: 1,413 (members: 115, guests: 1,298)

Online statistics

Members online
115
Guests online
1,298
Total visitors
1,413
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,793
Messages
18,192,374
Members
233,544
Latest member
jarneson59
Back
Top