Lost Prophets singer charged

[Phil Dicky]

gpo746 said:

Ali G said:

Phil Dicky said:

Ali G said:

Worse than Liam Brady?

I'm well aware of the details of these cases too, I would say cut from the same cloth....I'm assuming we are talking about 'Ian'

Edited by Phil Dicky on Wednesday 18th December 22:27

Yes - Ian Brady/Myra Hindley.

Although deeply unpleasant, I do not think this case comes close.

Partly perhaps because he was stopped before he could do worse ?

My thoughts exactly

[Baryonyx]

Mr GrimNasty said:

but also that the sentence appears disproportionate. Is that really such an unreasonable view?

Some would say the unduly lenient like yourself facilitate this sort of depraved behaviour.

[Skinley]

Catz said:

I might regret asking this but I can't seem to load that file.
Is my comp trying to tell me something?

I just read some of it and I wish I hadn't.

Sick bd.

[Galsia]

im said:

Alas you can never argue with the 'lock 'em up and throw away the key' brigade.

He's 36 years old and will be perhaps 65 when he gets out on licence...no money, no fame, no influence and with notoriety following him wherever he goes.

The sentence is......fair to slightly harsh.

He will still have the money...

[Catz]

Baryonyx said:

Mr GrimNasty said:

but also that the sentence appears disproportionate. Is that really such an unreasonable view?

Some would say the unduly lenient like yourself facilitate this sort of depraved behaviour.

I think that's a bit unfair.

I was quite surprised by the sentence, thought he'd get 15-20. Not that I condone in any way what he did. But compare it to the likes of this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2432957/Te...
and this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8471960.stm

[BJG1]

Catz said:

I think that's a bit unfair.

I was quite surprised by the sentence, thought he'd get 15-20. Not that I condone in any way what he did. But compare it to the likes of this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2432957/Te...
and this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8471960.stm

Quite. Regardless of whether one is too long or the other too short, getting 35 years for what Watkins did vs 10 years for Baby P's killer for raping a 2 year old feels a little... off.

Edited by BJG1 on Wednesday 18th December 23:51

[Pesty]

As somebody else said above. Those are too Lenient not the other way around.

Some liberal hand wingers probably thought they could be rehabilitated. They should have got life too.

[Chicken Chaser]

I can only fear whats in that report as I dont wish to read it.

Undoubtedly an horrific case where I think the sentence is bang on. Sends a message out, puts his harm away from the public and with any luck, he'll perish in there.

The fact that some consider it harsh either says more about the individual or the fact that our sentencing guidelines are too soft.

Consider it if it was your son or daughter, would the sentence be too harsh then?

[BJG1]

None of his band mates had any idea apparently, 6 mins 20 into this video seems a bit of a strange exchange then http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THumayDY8bA&t=6...

edit: I can't work out actually if they're laughing at "baby girl" or something inaudible one of them says.

Edited by BJG1 on Thursday 19th December 00:01

[carinaman]

Patrick Butler in The Guardian on 14 June 2011 said:

Great Ormond Street hospital issues apology to Baby P whistleblower Paediatrician Kim Holt, who warned about shortfalls at the clinic where Baby P was treated, now works for another NHS trust.

From:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/jun/14/bab...

Miranda Prynne on The Telegraph website on 18 Dec 2013 said:

Ian Watkins case: three police forces investigated by IPCC The police watchdog is now investigating three forces over claims they failed to act quickly enough after receiving abuse allegations against Ian Watkins.

From:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10525...

Another comparison with the 'Baby P' Peter Connolly case.

[Catz]

BJG1 said:

None of his band mates had any idea apparently, 6 mins 20 into this video seems a bit of a strange exchange then http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THumayDY8bA&t=6...

edit: I can't work out actually if they're laughing at "baby girl" or something inaudible one of them says.

Edited by BJG1 on Thursday 19th December 00:01

If you listen carefully the question is from babygirl and he actually answers "heroin" ... then when questioned says something like "I've just answered it" ... then replies "smack".

It's quite hard to hear as they're all talking over him.

Edited by Catz on Thursday 19th December 00:15

Edited by Catz on Thursday 19th December 00:15

[BJG1]

Catz said:

If you listen carefully the question is from babygirl and he actually answers "heroin" ... then when questioned says something like "I've just answered it" ... then replies "smack".

It's quite hard to hear as they're all talking over him.

Ah, right you are! As you were people...

[Catz]

However the weird thing is Woman A is mentioned on that vid. The court proceedings said she met IW in 2011 but evidently she was in touch with him before that via twitter.

[gpo746]

In amongst all of this one thing I heard repeated raised my eyebrows
he has 27TB of stuff and it went on something like more than the police force had space available ?????
I may have heard it wrong but really I mean really

That's only like 27 drives of 1tb each ????

This is a genuine question by the way did I hear it wrong or do I simply misunderstand

[Catz]

Only??

Something you want to tell us?

Although I was surprised SW police couldn't cope with it.

[LiamM45]

Watkins got the sentence he deserved, what annoys me though, is that the women involved got substantially shorter sentences.

None of these 3 people involved should be allowed to mix with the general public again in my opinion. I hope they all painfully rot behind bars.

[Bibbs]

captainzep said:

On a slightly different tack I feel very sorry for the other band members. Their songs, their work, will never be played again. Careers tainted, royalties lost and they never did anything wrong. By all accounts they disliked the bloke in the final years of the band, before any allegations came out.

They should re-release the albums with a new singer.

It would have sales of the people who like the music, but can't listen to 'his voice'. And may re-establish them, with a new album out after.

[kev1974]

gpo746 said:

In amongst all of this one thing I heard repeated raised my eyebrows
he has 27TB of stuff and it went on something like more than the police force had space available ?????
I may have heard it wrong but really I mean really

That's only like 27 drives of 1tb each ????

This is a genuine question by the way did I hear it wrong or do I simply misunderstand

Although some news outlets have written their stories to imply that it was 27tb of porn I have not seen anything trustworthy that backs that implication up.
Everything official has not specified what the 27tb of data was, the bulk of it may well have been music/video data connected with his band, and only a few gb of porn, nobody knows except him and the police.

[swansea v6]

Quick question for anyone in the know. If Watkins was originally raided for drugs, why would the police take his phone/laptop etc away from him then? I always assumed, rightly or wrongly, that the police would need a warrant to take anything from the house? To me it just seems weird to take computer equipment if just looking for drugs? Unless they were specifically checking out these allegations that had been made against him.

[swansea v6]

WeirdNeville said:

Evidence is evidence. I don't know specifics, but lets say they found a quantity which indicated either heavy personal consumption or possible supply. Seizing computer equipment and phones would be routine under those circumstances to see if there is a wider investigation to be mounted. Once it is lawfully in police possession, they are entitled to retain it and do as they please in the course of investigating it. As soon as you start finding large encrypted files (or potentially small unencrypted tidbits) alarm bells go off and you start digging deeper.

Data on Laptops seized lawfully in evidence for one offence can go on to be evidence of another offence.

No wararnt required if the search is carried out under Sec 18(1) or 18(5) or Sec 32 of PACE - search after arrest for evidence. Warrants may be required for other properties or circumstances.

Thank you!