Stuart Hall now charged with various offences
17 June 2013, 04:04 PM
#63
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People didn't often report this stuff back in the day. Adults in authority tended not to believe kids, parents would be ashamed or embarrassed, celebrities were charismatic people who everyone looked up to they had a lot of sway in local communities. Things are a bit different now and the internet is one main reason IMHO. Also there a tendency to blame victims.
17 June 2013, 04:22 PM
#68
Nah, the judge was going to give him 5 months, but the police played their joker.
Good riddance - couldn't stand the verbose prat.
BTW It's not a shame he "fell into temptation", Les - that's a moronic thing to say. Are you implying the 9 year old led him on or something? It's his fault fullstop; whether he's "a good entertainer" or whatever
Good riddance - couldn't stand the verbose prat.
BTW It's not a shame he "fell into temptation", Les - that's a moronic thing to say. Are you implying the 9 year old led him on or something? It's his fault fullstop; whether he's "a good entertainer" or whatever
17 June 2013, 04:26 PM
#69
Scooby Regular
temptation, with implicit blame on the victim
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 17 June 2013 at 04:28 PM.
17 June 2013, 04:34 PM
#70
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who is guilty of such behaviour deserves what they get and hopefully the sentences are heavy enough to underline that.
Les
17 June 2013, 04:47 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't disagree F1, and if you read my post carefully you will realise that what I meant was that the fact that he carried out such disgraceful acts is a disappointment to me because I used to admire him as an entertainer.
Anyone who is guilty of such behaviour deserves what they get and hopefully the sentences are heavy enough to underline that.
Les
Anyone who is guilty of such behaviour deserves what they get and hopefully the sentences are heavy enough to underline that.
Les
17 June 2013, 05:08 PM
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Temptation exists of course and it generally can be said to be in the eye of the beholder. It is a feeling that can be experienced by anyone of course and any result from it is down to the will of the person involved. It can also be deliberately exacerbated by the actions of another person. Any shameful act is of course the fault of the person who allows it to overpower their better feelings.
For some inexplicable reason you seem to believe that because I said I was disappointed that Hall was guilty that I believe that he should not have been penalised. It must surely be obvious that I am sorry that he turned out to have misbehaved himself as he did since I admired his efforts as an entertainer. Doesn't mean in any way that I think he should not have been penalised. In fact I thought he got off lightly!
You and F1 Fan put an incorrect meaning on what I posted for no good reason. I did not say what you accused me of in the post. What you inferred is most unfair.
Les
17 June 2013, 05:15 PM
#73
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
17 June 2013, 05:54 PM
#74
Scooby Regular
You should be ashamed of making such an accusation. There is no way that you can land such a description on the way I think or for that matter the attitude of the Catholic religion.
Temptation exists of course and it generally can be said to be in the eye of the beholder. It is a feeling that can be experienced by anyone of course and any result from it is down to the will of the person involved. It can also be deliberately exacerbated by the actions of another person. Any shameful act is of course the fault of the person who allows it to overpower their better feelings.
For some inexplicable reason you seem to believe that because I said I was disappointed that Hall was guilty that I believe that he should not have been penalised. It must surely be obvious that I am sorry that he turned out to have misbehaved himself as he did since I admired his efforts as an entertainer. Doesn't mean in any way that I think he should not have been penalised. In fact I thought he got off lightly!
You and F1 Fan put an incorrect meaning on what I posted for no good reason. I did not say what you accused me of in the post. What you inferred is most unfair.
Les
Temptation exists of course and it generally can be said to be in the eye of the beholder. It is a feeling that can be experienced by anyone of course and any result from it is down to the will of the person involved. It can also be deliberately exacerbated by the actions of another person. Any shameful act is of course the fault of the person who allows it to overpower their better feelings.
For some inexplicable reason you seem to believe that because I said I was disappointed that Hall was guilty that I believe that he should not have been penalised. It must surely be obvious that I am sorry that he turned out to have misbehaved himself as he did since I admired his efforts as an entertainer. Doesn't mean in any way that I think he should not have been penalised. In fact I thought he got off lightly!
You and F1 Fan put an incorrect meaning on what I posted for no good reason. I did not say what you accused me of in the post. What you inferred is most unfair.
Les
and I will quote the relevant bit
"it is a shame that he fell into temptation"
what bit of that statement do you not mean
17 June 2013, 06:14 PM
#76
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Midlands
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's got off way too lightly for me. His defence was how long ago these events took place, and the sentence was in recognition of his age.
Sorry, but for me; once a nonce, always a nonce. He should be punished the same as if he did these things yesterday. No doubt he'll be segregated too.
Sorry, but for me; once a nonce, always a nonce. He should be punished the same as if he did these things yesterday. No doubt he'll be segregated too.
17 June 2013, 11:55 PM
#78
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point was that it is a pity that he did not resist that temptation and the fact that he did not means that he deserved to be found guilty of shameful behaviour and to be punished for doing so. I was disappointed that he turned out to be such a character that he could do such a thing.
That is what I said in so many words and I really don't understand the reasons for the criticisms of me that you made. Did you not understand what I was saying, and if you did-please explain yourself!
Les
18 June 2013, 12:03 AM
#79
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes you are right F1, I only mentioned you because I thought you did not understand my earlier post. Falling into temptation is in no way less serious when committing a shameful action.
Les
18 June 2013, 01:09 AM
#80
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not as simple as being 'temped' Les, people like Hall are systematic manipulators conning everyone and using everyone. He was quite happy to slur his accusers by calling them liars and saying they had a conspiracy against him before he was forced to plead guilty, and he was forced 'cos the evidence was so strong and they would have hit him with more serious charges had he not agreed to what was a tacit plea bargin. I don't have any sympathy for these people 'cos the charm is superficial being one half of a duplicity. And as normal once jail beckons he is all 'frail' and ill looking, in 'ill healthy' etc.
18 June 2013, 09:14 AM
#81
Kid comes home in tears, tells parents what happened.
Father understandably goes looking for Hall(presumably to assault him), but can't find him, so family decide not to report the incident to the police.
So what did they tell the kid - it was all in your imagination?
Father understandably goes looking for Hall(presumably to assault him), but can't find him, so family decide not to report the incident to the police.
So what did they tell the kid - it was all in your imagination?
Last edited by urban; 18 June 2013 at 09:17 AM.
18 June 2013, 03:10 PM
#82
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not as simple as being 'temped' Les, people like Hall are systematic manipulators conning everyone and using everyone. He was quite happy to slur his accusers by calling them liars and saying they had a conspiracy against him before he was forced to plead guilty, and he was forced 'cos the evidence was so strong and they would have hit him with more serious charges had he not agreed to what was a tacit plea bargin. I don't have any sympathy for these people 'cos the charm is superficial being one half of a duplicity. And as normal once jail beckons he is all 'frail' and ill looking, in 'ill healthy' etc.
Talking about temptation, if a person gets the urge to do something in particular which they personally find attractive surely that can be referred to as temptation regardless of whether the act in question is either nothing to be concerned about morally or otherwise,or whether it is a shameful action which is being considered.
The word temptation does not necessarily mean a bad or a good thing to do. The actual effect of the action is purely down to the particular thing that the person concerned has got in mind.
The way in which I intended when I mentioned that word in connection with Hall's own admitted disgusting behaviour was in no way designed to justify his actions or to minimise the seriousness of his paediophilia. I find it difficult to understand why anyone should think that from what I said. My point is that he would doubtless have been tempted to do what he did because of his sexual predelictions and the situation in which he found himself in the company of young children. As I said in my previous post, giving way to any form of temptation does not justify such actions as he committed nor does it in any way decrease the seriousness of the offences that he was responsible for. I wonder if those who were criticising me for using that word actually understood its full meaning or its usage.
I sincerely hope that the explanation I have given will make my use of the word clear. I can assure you that being considered as trying to justify the actions of a wicked paedophiliac does not sit very well with me.
It is quite upsetting that some were so quick to jump at me assuming that I should be a supporter of a character such as Hall or his ilk! Nothing that I said justified that attitude.
Les
20 June 2013, 01:02 PM
#88
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Markyate.Imprezas owned:-wrx-sti5typeR-p1-uk22b-modded my00. Amongst others!
Posts: 8,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I read he was sentenced according to the sentences imposed when the offences took place, and NOT according to what's given now for the same type of offence.