« Topics
12345...585960
Wicko1,528 posts since 3 Dec 2003
Meridian (South) South Today
Why didn't these "raped" women go to the police when it happened?.


Off topic, but what an absolutely ridiculous view you hold. Moron.


Yes, perhaps my choice of wording wasn't appropriate, I should have explained it better. But the argument is still there. To suddenly face "allegations" in a climate where everyone seems to face "allegations" and at a rapid speed, seems peculiar to me. It's like a domino effect, one person says something, another follows suit and so on. There is nothing moronic about my views though. They are simply different to yours, and name calling is not really necessary. After all, a moron is unlikely to be able to possess views that are part of debate are they? The question still exists though. Why didn't they go to the police at the time? If they had done there would have been thorough medical checks done and the accused would have been proven to carried it out, and the case would have been more straightforward. The victims would have been counselled and given the assistance they need, and more victims would be willing to come forward in the future because they know their complaint would be taken seriously. All that has arisen now is a "he said, she said" scenario that can cause unnecessary distress for both the accused and the alleged victims. Why name him anyway? Surely if there is no proof or judgement against him, he is entitled to remain an innocent citizen until proven otherwise?
Last edited by Wicko on 12 November 2017 10:19am
If we only get one life, why does it take several attempts to get it right?
JCB1,913 posts since 21 Sep 2004
The bigger concern for the BBC is they've got three hours of primetime in Christmas week to fill having pulled their big Christmas drama from the schedule due to rape allegations against one of it's stars.


Shouldn't be too much of a problem at the moment, it would have been more of an issue if the schedule deadline had already passed. I'm sure they've got enough time to sort out an alternative schedule plan to fill this void.

It's more of an annoyance for the BBC in that this Agatha Christie drama was going to be one of the main highlights of their schedule. Depending on the outcome of these allegations, it's possible it may never get broadcast. But they obviously had no choice other than to remove it from their festive schedule plans. We just have to keep an open mind at this stage- innocent until proved guilty etc.


I don't agree that they should have pulled it. Are we not able to make our own minds up anymore? Blimey, they knew what Jimmy Savile was up to and they still put out Jim'll Fix It every Christmas! Yes, the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" has long gone


I too miss the good old days when known monsters like Saville were free to roam because "innocent until proven guilty" Rolling Eyes
4
tmorgan96, dbl and 2 others
  • ManicPumpkin
  • London Lite
gave kudos
Wicko1,528 posts since 3 Dec 2003
Meridian (South) South Today

Shouldn't be too much of a problem at the moment, it would have been more of an issue if the schedule deadline had already passed. I'm sure they've got enough time to sort out an alternative schedule plan to fill this void.

It's more of an annoyance for the BBC in that this Agatha Christie drama was going to be one of the main highlights of their schedule. Depending on the outcome of these allegations, it's possible it may never get broadcast. But they obviously had no choice other than to remove it from their festive schedule plans. We just have to keep an open mind at this stage- innocent until proved guilty etc.


I don't agree that they should have pulled it. Are we not able to make our own minds up anymore? Blimey, they knew what Jimmy Savile was up to and they still put out Jim'll Fix It every Christmas! Yes, the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" has long gone


I too miss the good old days when known monsters like Saville were free to roam because "innocent until proven guilty" Rolling Eyes


Ah, but you are collating known knowledge, i'e Savile, with allegations, and regarding them as the same. What we know now about Savile was only what most suspected at the time. The two scenarios are totally different. Savile was knowingly stalking women through his career - and seemingly everyone knew about it but allowed it to happen. With this actor, it is merely allegations, which has not received any police investigation and is based on a "he said she said" level of defence. The person accused has categorically denied it. Of course, if he is guilty then he must answer to his actions and face the consequences. But what if he is never found guilty? Never fully investigated and never ever declared innocent? These allegations could hang over him forever and damage his career when he might not actually have done anything at all. It seems like a form of persecution to pull the drama as it is in a way the BBC saying "we think he is guilty" when they have already said "we are making no judgement." Well, their actions suggest they most definately making judgements.

I would also add, that if ever anyone was knowingly acting and behaving the way Savile did, then of course the book must be thrown at them. There is no place at all for them in society. But people who have just been rumoured to have done something, without investigation, without founded allegation and without a fair justice system, should not be pre judged or given a trial by media. That is really the point I was trying to make. We are all capable of making our own minds up.
If we only get one life, why does it take several attempts to get it right?
Brekkie29,572 posts since 4 Jan 2003
HTV Wales Wales Today
Of course, if he is guilty then he must answer to his actions and face the consequences. But what if he is never found guilty? Never fully investigated and never ever declared innocent? These allegations could hang over him forever and damage his career when he might not actually have done anything at all.

Ala Barrymore.

BBC definately damned either way but also feel in these cases the hard work others put into a project is completely dismissed due to allegations against one person. It is also an ensemble piece rather than him being the lead. However in this case suspect the length of time between scheduling and broadcast doesn't help - even if the argument is there now based on two allegations to proceed with airing it the BBC need to consider what else might come out in the weeks ahead.

I also think with such allegations people are judged by society rather than law. I doubt many people waited until the verdict to draw their own conclusions on Michael Jackson.
Shouldn't that have been posted in the "John Logie Baird has Invented Television" thread?
2
DE88 and ChrisPBacon gave kudos