Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Adam Faith spied on Fidel Castro!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Steve Crook View Post
    Hearsay, rumour, and you can't libel the dead so he can't deny it

    Steve
    Exactly! That's why when a famous person dies they can often run stories on them for weeks.

    I won't buy newspapers and to be honest I try to only listen to the initial facts on the t.v news, but then switch off when it goes into details for sensationalism. If things are true or not, there doesn't seem to be much respect or compassion for family and friends of those who have died, as if they haven't enough to contend with at the time.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Steve Crook View Post

      Potentially libellous, but you can't libel the dead so people feel free to write any old nonsense about those who are no longer with us

      It's up to a judge to decide whether it's really libel

      Steve
      The same with Jimmy Savile, not a single piece of smoking gun evidence has ever been produced about his past, yet people chose to believe what they were reading in the newspapers which consisted of 'he said she said'

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Bert Quark View Post

        The same with Jimmy Savile, not a single piece of smoking gun evidence has ever been produced about his past, yet people chose to believe what they were reading in the newspapers which consisted of 'he said she said'
        What exactly is "smoking gun evidence"?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Shirley Brahms View Post

          What exactly is "smoking gun evidence"?
          Some real evidence rather than just hearsay with people telling newspapers "He touched me in 1976" for a fee from the papers

          Steve

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Shirley Brahms View Post

            What exactly is "smoking gun evidence"?
            It comes from looking for evidence and finding a solid item that is not immediately apparent but when found clearly proves who did something or shows how something happened.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Bert Quark View Post

              The same with Jimmy Savile, not a single piece of smoking gun evidence has ever been produced about his past, yet people chose to believe what they were reading in the newspapers which consisted of 'he said she said'
              It's different in certain cases like that when there are a lot of people saying the same thing to authorities, not just what the press is printing, there was a full police investigation.
              Last edited by Faginsgirl; 28th March 2017, 10:31 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Steve Crook View Post

                Some real evidence rather than just hearsay with people telling newspapers "He touched me in 1976" for a fee from the papers

                Steve
                Wow! Cynicism rules!


                Originally posted by Faginsgirl View Post

                It's different in certain cases like that when there are a lot of people saying the same thing to authorities, not just what the press is printing, there was a full police investigation.
                Precisely. It's staggering to read some people still prefer to believe all his victims are liars.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Faginsgirl View Post

                  It's different in certain cases like that when there are a lot of people saying the same thing to authorities, not just what the press is printing, there was a full police investigation.
                  Yes but this investigation happened post mortem. JS was in the public eye for 50 years or more and it appears that absolutely nothing came to light in those years, his accusers now amount to around 500 and include men.women, children, the sick and even the dead ..now surely after that even the smartest person in the world would have made some slip up somewhere that would have brought even a column inch in the press? ..A little Jimmy somewhere perhaps claiming he was his Dad?

                  The only things that appeared in the press while he was alive were positive reports abut his charity work...However the press eagerly ran a story that he had sat with his dead Mother for 3 days and kept her clothes in a mausoleum type flat depicting him as loopy..so why did they never pick up on at least one tiny one of these accusations?
                  These accusations made when he was alive would have been keys to the candy shop for papers like 'The News Of The World'

                  They say that he was so powerful he could shut stories down - why was he powerful? he was a terrible presenter and was on Top of The Pops about once a month-hardly somebody the BBC to ill afford to loose. They say he had connections in high places- don't you think he was checked out by MI5 when he hobnobbed with the royals? or Mossad when he hobnobbed with the Israeli gov..where are those files today?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Shirley Brahms View Post

                    Wow! Cynicism rules!

                    Precisely. It's staggering to read some people still prefer to believe all his victims are liars.
                    Not all of them, but I am very suspicious of many of them - especially the ones who got paid by the newspapers for their stories (and often didn't also report it to the police)

                    The newspapers were just jumping on the bandwagon of people accusing 1970s pop stars & DJs (and other people) without any proof

                    Steve

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Faginsgirl View Post

                      It's different in certain cases like that when there are a lot of people saying the same thing to authorities, not just what the press is printing, there was a full police investigation.
                      But many of those people didn't report it to the authorities, just to the newspapers (for a fat fee)

                      Steve

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Steve Crook View Post

                        Not all of them, but I am very suspicious of many of them - especially the ones who got paid by the newspapers for their stories (and often didn't also report it to the police)
                        OK, I understand what you mean now. I misunderstood and thought you meant JS never did harm to anyone.

                        The newspapers were just jumping on the bandwagon of people accusing 1970s pop stars & DJs (and other people) without any proof

                        Steve
                        Difficult to actually prove one way or the other in the case of a deceased person. Given that the offences happened over six decades, a very high number of victims is feasible. But whatever the numbers, he did a lot of damage to a lot of people......

                        Not considered "hearsay" by Scotland Yard.

                        "Scotland Yard launched a criminal investigation into allegations of child sex abuse by Savile spanning six decades, describing him as a "predatory sex offender", and later stated that they were pursuing more than 400 lines of inquiry based on the testimony of 300 potential victims via 14 police forces across the UK. By late October 2012, the scandal had resulted in inquiries or reviews at the BBC, within the National Health Service, the Crown Prosecution Service, and the Department of Health.

                        In June 2014, investigations into Savile's activities in 28 NHS hospitals, including Leeds General Infirmary and Broadmoor psychiatric hospital, concluded that he had sexually assaulted staff and patients aged between five and 75 throughout several decades." ~Wikipedia


                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Shirley Brahms View Post
                          OK, I understand what you mean now. I misunderstood and thought you meant JS never did harm to anyone.
                          Saville harmed me, just by his presence on TV


                          Not considered "hearsay" by Scotland Yard.

                          "Scotland Yard launched a criminal investigation into allegations of child sex abuse by Savile spanning six decades, describing him as a "predatory sex offender", and later stated that they were pursuing more than 400 lines of inquiry based on the testimony of 300 potential victims via 14 police forces across the UK. By late October 2012, the scandal had resulted in inquiries or reviews at the BBC, within the National Health Service, the Crown Prosecution Service, and the Department of Health.

                          In June 2014, investigations into Savile's activities in 28 NHS hospitals, including Leeds General Infirmary and Broadmoor psychiatric hospital, concluded that he had sexually assaulted staff and patients aged between five and 75 throughout several decades." ~Wikipedia
                          You should never quote from Wikipedia, unless it cites other sources. Then you may as well just cite the real sources

                          Steve

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            It did cite other sources, but I deleted the links for the post.
                            Citing the real sources would be very time-consuming. Wiki already has it a nutshell.









                            .
                            Last edited by Shirley Brahms; 28th March 2017, 08:21 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Shirley Brahms View Post
                              It did cite other sources, but I deleted the links for the post.
                              Citing the real sources would be very time-consuming. Wiki already has it a nutshell..
                              Yes, a broken nutshell
                              Tthere are many, many lies on Wikidpedia where other people haven't noticed them or haven't bothered to correct them yet

                              I always prefer to cite the links that WikidPedia cites, even if you only give them as links and let us read them

                              Steve

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Shirley Brahms View Post


                                In June 2014, investigations into Savile's activities in 28 NHS hospitals, including Leeds General Infirmary and Broadmoor psychiatric hospital, concluded that he had sexually assaulted staff and patients aged between five and 75 throughout several decades." ~Wikipedia


                                Think about it ..are we really suppose to conclude that one man was allowed to rampantly run around hospitals for decades assaulting the sick and then going to the mortuary to have sex with the dead .. and not one single person in authority had the strength to stop him....just because they had seen him on TOTPs?

                                Surely even if they did not want a backlash they could have at least quietly stopped him from entering their hospitals with a suitable excuse?

                                You will never see this on TV again .... and the girls don't look worried just bored with his inane presentation.

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl5xMSRQA-U

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X