I wonder how many men of a certain vintage are glad they aren't famous?

If operation Yewtree went looking at say senior managers in local council's or companies back then I bet they would soon have a list as long as they have with them targeting the celebs of the time.

That said you could argue we should not want to pardon the 300 odd first world war British soldiers who were shot by firing squad if we are going to accept things that happened back then did so because they reflect the attitudes of the time.

If we consider that wrong, why would we not want to prosecute alleged rapes because they occurred in the 70's and 80's?

I think the answer is with the men shot by firing squad it is a defined number many of whom were unjustly shot given what we know of their cases now whereas I can't help feeling there must be hundreds of men who behaved in the working environment no differently to the likes of DLT and he and other celebs are only being charged because they are celebs.

By that I am not saying it was routine for men to commit the more serious offences DLT has been charged with but it certainly wasn't uncommon for the odd grope to happen. Maybe being famous the likes of DLT had far more women hanging around to give him the opportunity and while that is no excuse for assault I don't think it necessarily means he was any more of a sexual predator than those senior managers I alluded to.

I also think it is a matter of degree. Jimmy Savile was on a different level compared to the list of offences DLT has been charged with and I am not sure it is in the public interest to be trying someone who grabbed someone boob and said "securi-titty" as one of the charges. Stick to the alleged rape and more serious allegations if you are going to do it at all.

Very good point, succinctly made.

It's a very interesting question.

I think one of the differences is the evidence or lack of it.

One of the things that concerns me about the current situation on sex abuse cases is that of evidence. There will be no forensic evidence, no records etc, nobody will have alibis that can be checked – so it simply comes down to one person's word against another's.

And I agree with the rest of your post.

I think people do care. The social media storm after the verdict, where people were either claiming that he must be guilty, irrespective of the verdict, because the woman must be believed, or the opposite of that, that the woman should be (in effect) hung, drawn and quartered etc etc.

And the former – that the woman (because that is how it is always talked about) should be automatically believed – is a growing view: and a very dangerous one, IMO.

In the case of Stuart Hall, it was multiple people's word against his. Many victims came forward telling the same broad story of his abuse, none of whom knew each other.

Had it been just 1 victim, I doubt it would have gone as far as it did.

This is my concern also. I can't remember what I was doing last week half the time so how the accused are going to disprove the allegations I really don't know.

I suppose being the celebs they are what they were doing or where they were working may well be a matter of record but that can be used against them to place them where the alleged offences took place. It would only help them if it placed them elsewhere at the time of the alleged offences so DLT working on Top of the Pops is already circumstantial evidence he was where one of the offences is alleged to have taken place whether he has any recollection of the time or not.

Unless they can uncover a tape of that film of him committing the offence on Top of the Pops I can't see how this is anything other than his word against that of his accusers.

I'm just wondering how many ageing Rockers who had ther heydays in the 60's & 70's are squirming?
Then, to have your pick of 'groupies' was considered a perk of the job.
OK, any possible complaint now would be defended as consensual sex, but again, without firm proof (e.g. DNA evidence from any resulting offspring), it's down to one word against another.

There's also the stigma to consider... Would any successful, respectible mature lady ever wish to rake up and air their past lifestyle in public?

They did. they played it to the jury.

What song was playing at the time?
Did the behaviour fit the song or was it totally inappropriate?
lol

Oddly enough nobody that I know has identified the clip other than it was apparently from 1978.

1978?



[iSometimes When We Touch[/i - Dan Hill ?

Admittedly I only heard a brief news report, but it seemed to say that the girl's face had a different expression after the alleged offence. How can that be classed as "evidence"?

If that's the case, it would be deeply worrying if it was considered as evidence.

1978?




You're The One That I Want
Rat Trap
Girl’s School
If I Can't Have You
My Best Friend's Girl
Man With The Child In His Eyes
Run For Home
With A Little Luck (no fuc£er will catch me)
Brown Girl In The Ring

Trah lah lah lah lah.

Good guesses, but at least I can narrow down the song. 'Twas Father Abraham and the Smurfs.

("[iWhere are you all coming from?[/i
..."icon_wink.gif







I'll get me coat

Wasn't it Rolf Harris..


"ooh-ahh, ooh-ahh, ooh-ahh.... can you tell what it is yet?"

Did Semen and Garall have any tracks out in '78?








TAXI!!

Not recorded in '78 but they may have re-released these,
For Emily whenever I may fuc£ her.
Hey, Schoolgirl
Two Teen-Agers
That Silver-Haired Daddy of Mine
Somewhere They Can't Find Me

Or was he just asking her if she thought he lived up to his nickname of the ' hairy monster'?
Or should that be 'measured' up?

Gary Puckett and the union Gap - young girl

or maybe Police dont stand so close to me ?

Have you some skeletons in the cupboard Mr Ferret?
I behest thee to cleanse one's soul of them.
It shall go no further than this forum.

From what I have been reading about this the offending act wasn't present in the video having supposedly been cut before the show was transmitted. Apparently it only shows DLT with his arm around the alleged victim supposedly after the event but the actual offence is not on the tape.

There's one I've seen that's fairly well known and easily found on YT, Saville is talking between songs and the girl next to him starts squirming and wriggling uncomfortably. IIRC she has testified Saville stuck his hand in her knickers. Not sure how old she was.

*edit - appears you're talking about DLT. Never mind.

Quote ="Cronus"There's one I've seen that's fairly well known and easily found on YT, Saville is talking between songs and the girl next to him starts squirming and wriggling uncomfortably. IIRC she has testified Saville stuck his hand in her knickers. Not sure how old she was. *edit - appears you're talking about DLT. Never mind.'" www.news.com.au/world/australian ... 6504479477 Is this the one? Quote In the clip Savile says to the camera: "I tell you something, a fella could get used to this, as it happens, he really could get used to it." Ms Edwards said the experience damaged her and later contributed to the collapse of her marriage.'"

Quote ="Cronus"There's one I've seen that's fairly well known and easily found on YT, Saville is talking between songs and the girl next to him starts squirming and wriggling uncomfortably. IIRC she has testified Saville stuck his hand in her knickers. Not sure how old she was. *edit - appears you're talking about DLT. Never mind.'" www.news.com.au/world/australian ... 6504479477 Is this the one? Quote In the clip Savile says to the camera: "I tell you something, a fella could get used to this, as it happens, he really could get used to it." Ms Edwards said the experience damaged her and later contributed to the collapse of her marriage.'"