Rolf Harris - trial starts today

[BlackLabel]

Rolf Harris conducted “brazen” sexual assaults against seven women and girls, one of them aged 12 and another disabled and blind, a jury has been told. The TV entertainer, 86, appeared via video link at Southwark crown court from HMP Stafford where, the jury heard, he is serving a prison sentence following conviction for sexual offences in 2014.

[telecat]

BlackLabel said:

Rolf Harris conducted “brazen” sexual assaults against seven women and girls, one of them aged 12 and another disabled and blind, a jury has been told. The TV entertainer, 86, appeared via video link at Southwark crown court from HMP Stafford where, the jury heard, he is serving a prison sentence following conviction for sexual offences in 2014.

And Cleared of three of them and the Jury was discharged on the remaining Four. Prosecution have one week to decide on a retrial.

[Welshbeef]

telecat said:

And Cleared of three of them and the Jury was discharged on the remaining Four. Prosecution have one week to decide on a retrial.

Isn't he close to now doing half his original jail term = leave jail?

[mybrainhurts]

Welshbeef said:

telecat said:

And Cleared of three of them and the Jury was discharged on the remaining Four. Prosecution have one week to decide on a retrial.

Isn't he close to now doing half his original jail term = leave jail?

Hide your daughters...

And goats. Probably...

[KTF]

Welshbeef said:

Isn't he close to now doing half his original jail term = leave jail?

I think he is due for release around June/July this year.

[Jonesy23]

The potentially interesting bit is that the defence case this time around seems to have been much the same as their original one i.e. that he wasn't in the places where the assaults were claimed to have happened. Only they seem to have made a better job of it this time.

Looks a lot like an appeal against his original conviction is being put together.

[loafer123]

He was allegedly "gropey" (I have informed first hand sources) but whether he was "molestey" is more debatable. The line between the two is thin and is altered by the lens of time.

[Halmyre]

mybrainhurts said:

Welshbeef said:

telecat said:

And Cleared of three of them and the Jury was discharged on the remaining Four. Prosecution have one week to decide on a retrial.

Isn't he close to now doing half his original jail term = leave jail?

Hide your daughters...

And goats. Probably...

Kangaroos, definitely.

[BlackLabel]

"Former TV presenter Rolf Harris will face a retrial on three sex offence charges and one new count, a prosecutor at Southwark Crown Court has said."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rol...

[Welshbeef]

BlackLabel said:

"Former TV presenter Rolf Harris will face a retrial on three sex offence charges and one new count, a prosecutor at Southwark Crown Court has said."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rol...

For what reason?
Normal rules of a retrial are new evidence has come forward OR an issue with the jury where they might have not been as unbiased. As thought?

Ie if RH wants a retrial on the conviction he is serving he can only do so IF material new evidence comes to light if not then hard luck. Hence a certain J Bamber (innocent)

[snuffy]

If a jury cannot come to a conclusion then that's a mistrail and that's the main reason for having retrail.

In this case, they could not decide one way or the other, hence Rolf is being tried again.

[TheGuru]

There is no excuse for the underage stuff - but what is driving the relentless pursuit of these charges that appear to be similar to what millions of men would have done at nightclubs and other places in the 70s/80s and indeed even today.

Where is the public interest in locking him up further?

[Welshbeef]

snuffy said:

If a jury cannot come to a conclusion then that's a mistrail and that's the main reason for having retrail.

In this case, they could not decide one way or the other, hence Rolf is being tried again.

Of the 7 he was cleared of 3 the remaining 4 were discharged.
Is it 3 of these 4 for the retrial or as I read it retrial of the 3 which he was cleared of?

[anonymous-user]

Welshbeef said:

Of the 7 he was cleared of 3 the remaining 4 were discharged.
Is it 3 of these 4 for the retrial or as I read it retrial of the 3 which he was cleared of?

Have a guess.

[Welshbeef]

desolate said:

Welshbeef said:

Of the 7 he was cleared of 3 the remaining 4 were discharged.
Is it 3 of these 4 for the retrial or as I read it retrial of the 3 which he was cleared of?

Have a guess.

The three he was acquitted of knowing the state of our legal system.
What an absolute farce.

[anonymous-user]

TheGuru said:

There is no excuse for the underage stuff - but what is driving the relentless pursuit of these charges that appear to be similar to what millions of men would have done at nightclubs and other places in the 70s/80s and indeed even today.

Where is the public interest in locking him up further?

Just because others have done it doesn't diminish what he has allegedly done.

The public interest is allowing justice for victims of a serial sex offender.

[anonymous-user]

La Liga said:

TheGuru said:

There is no excuse for the underage stuff - but what is driving the relentless pursuit of these charges that appear to be similar to what millions of men would have done at nightclubs and other places in the 70s/80s and indeed even today.

Where is the public interest in locking him up further?

Just because others have done it doesn't diminish what he has allegedly done.

The public interest is allowing justice for victims of a serial sex offender.

Alleged victims.

[Welshbeef]

REALIST123 said:

Alleged victims.

Wasn't it found in the latest court case that RH witnesses came forward bring huge doubt over his original conviction.
Ie a few key individuals who had run the hall on the south coast for 30 years and without question they all state wholeheartedly RH never visited -- which is where one victims stated he did at an event for him and groped her.
His manager also stated at that time it was the peak of his career without question she wouldn't have sent him to a tiny venue for an event his celeb status was way bigger /he would draw a far higher fee and many more people than the venue could accommodate would attend. Also she never booked him there.

I couldn't give a monkeys about him personally however If we have an instance where an innocent man has served jail time on alleged victimes who are then proved to be loses. That is dispicable. If he is guilty let him rot if they lied bang them up and publicise their names & ensure RH is then compensated for a mis justice.

If all he is serving 6 years out on 3 is for a booby grab or fumble I'd wager most of the Male UK population is guilty.

[Halmyre]

Welshbeef said:

REALIST123 said:

Alleged victims.

Wasn't it found in the latest court case that RH witnesses came forward bring huge doubt over his original conviction.
Ie a few key individuals who had run the hall on the south coast for 30 years and without question they all state wholeheartedly RH never visited -- which is where one victims stated he did at an event for him and groped her.
His manager also stated at that time it was the peak of his career without question she wouldn't have sent him to a tiny venue for an event his celeb status was way bigger /he would draw a far higher fee and many more people than the venue could accommodate would attend. Also she never booked him there.

I couldn't give a monkeys about him personally however If we have an instance where an innocent man has served jail time on alleged victimes who are then proved to be loses. That is dispicable. If he is guilty let him rot if they lied bang them up and publicise their names & ensure RH is then compensated for a mis justice.

If all he is serving 6 years out on 3 is for a booby grab or fumble I'd wager most of the Male UK population is guilty.

Speak for yourself Gropey.

[zarjaz1991]

TheGuru said:

There is no excuse for the underage stuff - but what is driving the relentless pursuit of these charges that appear to be similar to what millions of men would have done at nightclubs and other places in the 70s/80s and indeed even today.m

Where is the public interest in locking him up further?

These days prosecutions are driven by vindictiveness and showing people who' s boss, public interest doesn't come into it.

The authorities have decided that Harris is going to die in prison, and they will keep going with this until it happens. He might as well top himself, the only retaliation of may sort that he has left.