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

I saw manipulation in the fact he said he was more popular in the UK than in Australia, since he is talking to a jury in the UK who may not be sure if that is true or not.
 
Despite the fact that it probably is true?

He lived there, he worked there, and was a big star in the UK in 1969. Most of our 'big stars' had to move to the UK back then to get anywhere, as the film/TV/entertainment industry here is notoriously crap (and still is, hence the exodus to the US now instead). I'm still not seeing 'manipulative'.

And by 1991 no-one gave a hoot about him here.

Just an edit to add: The two witnesses who recall Rolf being in Leigh park both mention Sid James and Diana Dors, with a few other stars who visited the area. It took me a while to realise they didn't all appear at the same event, and in fact Sid James and Diana's visits could have been almost a decade apart. Yet, the locals speak of them like they all happened at once. I found this a bit misleading when I was researching events in the area. So Rolf probably did visit - his lawyer put them there in '78. But no-one can put him there in '69 as the accuser says he was.
 
Another thing I'm noticing - while the hype continues on every word Rolf says about three of the alleged victims, nothing much is being said anymore about the accuser who said Rolf molested her at an event in Cambridge when she was 15 (or 13 or 14, depending on which account you read). It's like that accusation has dropped right off everyone's radar.

Is that because the defense -proved- he was elsewhere at the time?

Lots is said about how 'funny' it is all the accounts sound the same. Well, that one sounded like the others too, and it's pretty plain it didn't happen, if Rolf was not at said event.


"He denied ever being in Cambridge in 1975 where he was accused of barking at a dog and then fondling a 14 year-old woman during It’s a celebrity Knockout. Newspaper reports show at the time of It’s a Celebrity Knockout he was in Canada performing."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-27541102

So why isn't anyone asking -why- this account sounds like all the others, when it's patently rubbish and there's **proof** it's rubbish? How does that happen? Isn't that "funny" too?

It's not my intent at all to defend a pedophile, I feel like I ought to say this again.. What I am interested in is justice for all parties concerned. And I have a LOT of reason to question these accusations, because the accusers themselves have provided enough reason to do so.

If Rolf was on trial for being a horrible old groper, I'd probably join in the hype over every 'dodgy' word he says, because he well and truly deserves it.

But he's not on trial for that, and I find it seriously alarming that both in the trial and the media, he appears to be getting steamrolled for being a pedo, while valid doubts regarding witness veracity and even proof these events never happened are just somehow ignored.
 
Just to recap the Cambridge accuser's testimony:

The woman, who is 52 and cannot be named, said she went outside at the event - held in Cambridge in 1975 - and saw Harris on all fours barking at a dog.

She said she was "slightly awestruck" to see Harris and he came up to her and put "his left hand on my left shoulder".

The witness said: "I couldn't believe what was going on, this famous person was putting his arm around me.

"I was nervous then he moved and went up and down my back, over my bottom. It happened quite a few times. It was uncomfortable.

"I was too young to understand. It was like groping. Very firm. He squeezed it a few times."

The woman added: "I was completely frozen. I knew it was wrong. I didn't move. I was extremely embarrassed. He was not the slightest embarrassed."

http://news.sky.com/story/1262097/rolf-harris-barked-before-groping-teenager


The woman, who is now 52, said she was 13 or 14, at the time of the incident. While waitressing at the event in Cambridge in 1975, she was asked to investigate a strange barking noise. When she popped outside to have a look, she allegedly saw Harris, crouching on all fours and barking at a dog.

http://rtlec.co.uk/rolf-harris-crouched-on-all-fours-and-barked-like-a-dog/


With her voice wavering, she said: "I just stood there. I couldn't believe what was going on, this famous person putting his arm around me.

"To start, it was a very nervous but a good feeling. However, his hand then moved and his hand went up and down my back and his hand went over my bottom and it was very firm."

She told the court she had her back to the white marquee where the event was taking place, so the crowd could not see what was happening.

She said she could not remember detailed information about the day of the claimed grope because "the incident is bright red in my mind and everything else is grey".

The alleged victim told the court that she has "a physical reaction" whenever she sees Harris on television or in a photograph.

She told the jury: "It was Rolf Harris without a doubt and I can't bear seeing any image of him."


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/15/rolf-harris-sex-abuse-trial_n_5331850.html


Because 'everything else is grey' -- or, as it turns out, her story is an utter LIE. Despite sounding just like all the other accounts.

I'm not afraid to ask the question: how does that happen? Could it be she was riffing off similar accounts in other Yewtree trials? Were the Yewtree cops asking people similar -and leading- questions, and thereby eliciting similar responses? I think it's very peculiar.



Record of event in Cambridge, 25th of May 1975:
http://www.jsfnet.co.uk/series_1975_iak.htm

Record of Rolf being in Canada 16th of May 1975:
http://www.songkick.com/concerts/5045996-rolf-harris-at-southern-alberta-jubilee-auditorium

Rolf Harris, Australian singer, song writer and author, will make his National Arts Centre debut May 20. Harris is one of Australia's foremost recording artists.

http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/48532851/
 
Am I missing something? Has it been proven that he was in Canada on the 25th May 1975? The links above show that he was due to perform there the week before but make no mention of the 25th.
 
Supernovae said:
Am I missing something? Has it been proven that he was in Canada on the 25th May 1975? The links above show that he was due to perform there the week before but make no mention of the 25th.
Click to expand...


Well, I don't have the resources of the defense, yannow, sorry, it's just what I turned up on my lappy. I put in bold in a media link further up that newspapers prove Rolf was in Canada. The jury was shown a clip.

Apparently he also was filming TV shows there around that time. The information is difficult to dig up.
 
I actually apologise for making so many posts, but this is all really getting up my nose. The more I look, the more I see a decidedly biased 'spin' in a good deal of the media, some of which has little do with facts that --anyone- can check. Also, with facts the -police- could have checked but as far I can see, they did not.

And the resulting misinformation is being presented to a jury, which is to decide whether a man will be pegged as a pedophile in the minds of everyone, forever.

Example: the two "public event" witnesses.

1. Leigh Park Lady:

Detective Sergeant Gary Pankhurst was the last prosecution witness to give evidence at Harris's child sex trial in London. The senior investigating officer told the court “a lot of effort” went into trying to determine if Harris was at a community centre near Portsmouth in the late 1960s.

The jury was told police had searched Portsmouth newspapers published between 1968 and 1970 but “no trace was found of the event at the Leigh Park Community Centre described by (the alleged victim)”.

A search of council records and letter drops appealing for witnesses uncovered no definitive proof either.

Two locals did, however, give evidence last week that they recalled Harris being in the general area around that time.


-- What this report fails to mention, though it's information that isn't hard to dig up and examine (hey, I did it) is that these people ALSO report Sid James and Diana Dors being there around that time, also.

Yet, Dors was there "in the 70's" (no definitive date I could find, but several independent sources agree on "the 70's" and Dors' appearance bolsters this).

And Sid James was there in 1966. Three years before the alleged event.

The witness testimony does not put a definitive date on the Rolf appearance at all. The witnesses simply say he was there, like Sid and Diana were there. Sure, they were there -- perhaps a decade apart!! And in different venues!!

So we have Yewtree cop and witness for the prosecution saying he had people all over this, and they found --nothing-- to corroborate that Rolf was anywhere near Leigh Park in 1969. They could not even find the event.

We have witnesses who lump several celebrity visits that are --irrefutably-- separated by --years-- into the same time frame. With Rolf. Who --was-- there in 1978.


Leigh Park Lady managed eventually to offer a couple of chronological markers to back her story up: 1. She heard Two Little Boys. 2: It was 'around' the time of the moonlanding (July 25, 1969).

But Rolf was still in Australia until at least (to my limited findings) August 7. If this woman heard "Two Little Boys" it must have been among the first --ever-- performances of it, as Rolf did not even finish writing his version of the song until he was back in England and then recorded it for his TV show before jetting off to Geneva.

But do the papers pick up on this? Nope. I'm not even sure the defense is picking up on this. It's crazy.


2: Cambridge Lady:

I don't know what clips were shown to the jury, but apparently they were shown, and they prove Rolf was in Canada at the time of the Knockout event in Cambridge. The few links I could find seem to support that Rolf was indeed in Canada, and very busy with several projects.

Yewtree searched high and low for corroboration that Rolf was at Knockout, or even near Cambridge, and found none. They even searched video footage of the event. Found nothing.

My question is: Okay - but WHY have they not searched travel records? One can't just fly back and forth between nations and leave no record at all, surely? What about passports? Plane passenger lists?

No-one's mentioned looking there, at all. Yet it's a sure fire way to prove whether Rolf was even in England, let alone in Cambridge.

Perhaps the newspaper clips proved it well enough that they don't need to bother. But I don't see Yewtree saying they looked.


3: Bindi's Friend

I made a post about it already, but the whole "Rolf sexually admired her teenaged body" things is a crock of BS spun by Wass and the media. Rolf said nothing of the sort, Wass put words in his mouth, it's there for anyone to see.

4. Various adult complianants

The (very believable and well backed-up) accounts of Rolf groping adults prove.. what? That Rolf likes to grope ADULTS (for which he might, and should IMO, face a different set of charges). It has, however, -nothing- to do with the charges regarding PEDOPHILIA. So while it's well and good to gasp and glare over him being a dirty groper, it's a different thing to say "Oh well, he -must- be a pedo then!"


I am no longer any kind of fan of Rolf Harris, I assure you. But --I am -- a supporter of justice being done. And no matter how bad a person Rolf is, I hate that this investigation, the trial and the subsequent media coverage are -not- seeing things in a balanced sort of way, so justice and truth aren't getting much of a look-in.

And that pisses me off. Wonderful fuel for a witch-hunt though.

Yes, I went there.
 
Just saw that.

It was an It's a Knockout style event with Rolf and others rowing, bouncing etc.
In 1978. He said he didn't know where he was. He was just dropped off there.
 
It turns out he was in Cambridge in the 70s something he had denied (he said he hadn't been there until a few years ago), although not on "It's a Knockout," but short-lived ITV knock off, Star Games:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1574511/

Hosted by the ubiquitous Michael Aspel, 'Star Games' was an attempt by I.T.V. to out-knockout the B.B.C.'s 'Its A Knockout'. Seven teams of celebrities competed against one another in various sports such as swimming, rowing, archery, six a side football, tug of war, and so on. Amongst the 'good sports' were Ed 'Stewpot' Stewart, Denny Laine ( of the pop group 'Wings' ) Robin Askwith, Patrick Mower, Alvin Stardust, Tom Adams, Bernard Cribbins, Gareth Hunt, Jacqueline Pearce, Paul Darrow ( the last two were from the B.B.C.'s 'Blake's 7' sci-fi drama ), ex-'Monkees' Mickey Dolenz and Davy Jones, Maggie Norden ( daughter of Denis ), and Liza Goddard. Dudley Moore was fleetingly seen in one episode ( though I do not remember him participating in the games ). The winners received the much-coveted T.V. Times Trophy, with £15,000 going to charity. The show had the atmosphere of a schools' sports day, only with adults running amok instead of children.
Click to expand...

When being presented with video evidence of this he claimed he didn't know he was in Cambridge but had been dropped off in a "charabanc" (another detail he can remember after 35 years but couldn't remember where he was at the time):

https://twitter.com/Julian5News
 
1978 isn't 1975, is it, though? Which is what the accuser said, she said she was only 13 or 14 at the time. I did the math with her present age, and that's about right, 13 or 14 in 1975.

And that would make the accuser 16 or 17 in 1978. Not 13 or 14.

"I was too young to understand." ..she said.

I am a sufferer of PTSD over horrific abuse. I almost fried my brain in the 80's club scene -- and *I* can remember the difference between what happened at 14 and what happened at 17.

Can any of us really say they could mix those ages up, especially for an event that purportedly had such a profound impact?

I don't think so.

And I call BS on Rolf not remembering Cambridge in 1978. Even as a very elderly man under a lot of stress, he has a --lawyer-- who could have worked out he was there. There's a dozen ways he could have verified it and if he did remember, it looks very bad that he didn't admit it.

It's BS, and it's not helping him. BS all round, I reckon.
 
Ausgirl said:
1978 isn't 1975, is it, though? Which is what the accuser said, she said she was only 13 or 14 at the time. I did the math with her present age, and that's about right, 13 or 14 in 1975.

And that would make the accuser 16 or 17 in 1978. Not 13 or 14.

"I was too young to understand." ..she said.

I am a sufferer of PTSD over horrific abuse. I almost fried my brain in the 80's club scene -- and *I* can remember the difference between what happened at 14 and what happened at 17.

Can any of us really say they could mix those ages up, especially for an event that purportedly had such a profound impact?

I don't think so.
Click to expand...

The BBC gives her current age as 52, which would mean she was born in 1962(ish) making her 14 in 1978:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27420348

The 52-year-old, who was 13 or 14 at the time and working as a waitress at a marquee in Cambridge, said: "I was too young to understand, but it was basically like groping.
Click to expand...

Ausgirl said:
And I call BS on Rolf not remembering Cambridge in 1978. Even as a very elderly man under a lot of stress, he has a --lawyer-- who could have worked out he was there. There's a dozen ways he could have verified it and if he did remember, it looks very bad that he didn't admit it.

It's BS, and it's not helping him. BS all round, I reckon.
Click to expand...

His story is that they were dropped off without being told where they were.
 
Apologies for that, it turns out my Maths can be terrible at times. :-S
 
Supernovae said:
When being presented with video evidence of this he claimed he didn't know he was in Cambridge but had been dropped off in a "charabanc" (another detail he can remember after 35 years but couldn't remember where he was at the time):
Click to expand...

The accuser can't remember how old she was or what month the event was in, or what season it was, but she can recall a lot of highly specific information other than those things.

Seems everyone's memories are quite dodgy when it comes to this case. Meaning more $$$ spent in sorting it all out, which could have been used to help children being raped and abused *right now*.

And I just really, really, hate BS in these cases, from either side of the dock.
 
Although it's possible that, if she's only recently turned 52 and the event was in the first half of 1978, then she could have been 15, which would make her only a year out (not so far fetched). Although it would stand to reason that this would be the sort of event that would be more likely to be in Summer.
 
Jurors at Southwark crown court were told that despite searches of newspaper archives, no trace could be found of the entertainer appearing at a community centre near Portsmouth in 1969 or an event in Cambridge in 1975.

One alleged victim, then aged 14, claims Harris, 84, groped her bottom outside a Celebrity It's a Knock Out event in Cambridge.

-- So the jury was told she was 14.

The detective sergeant said that the alleged victim had not been entirely sure of the date, but "1975 was clearly she felt the most certain".

-- I find it really hard to believe she could not be sure whether she was three years older than 14 or not. One year, maybe. Not *three*.

quotes from : http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/23/rolf-harris-trial-scene-alleged-assaults
 
As for catching Rolf out in his own dubious memories..

He's all "oh I was far too famous to be opening dinky little shops" in that era. Research shows he was indeed a busy man in 1969, the purported year of the other molestation-at-event story, and probably was either overseas or in the studio for months either side of the moon landing.

But he wasn't "too famous" to open a plastic bag factory, which is where he was headed when the horse-drawn coach he was in turfed him out into the mud. That was later in 1969, IIRC. Having lag issues, I'll post a link later.

Anyway, just more evidence for BS on -that- side of the dock. I do not know what he's hoping to achieve with this 'deny everything all the time' approach. Guilty or innocent, it's making him look very duplicitous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 163 more.
Total: 1,694 (members: 164, guests: 1,530)

Online statistics

Members online
164
Guests online
1,530
Total visitors
1,694
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,803
Messages
18,192,700
Members
233,556
Latest member
Rachel_008
Back
Top