Sir Cliff Richard
Discussion
Legacywr said:
FredericRobinson said:
Gary Glitter doesn't get much airtime or space on Christmas compilations these days
Which I think is a bit unfair! It's not as if he will earn anything out it!carinaman said:
'There's no smoke without fire....
Quite.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478285/In...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2902671/Sh...
Reminds me of this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1260271/No...
How to turn negatives into positives.....
Reminds me of this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1260271/No...
How to turn negatives into positives.....
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/feb/24/daily...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2965969/EX...
Who knows?
There are no winners.
Charlie Foxtrot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2965969/EX...
Who knows?
There are no winners.
Charlie Foxtrot.
I reckon the Cliffster is going to win substantial libel damages from this utterly inept shambles.
BBC * Plod = Disaster squared.
I happened to see the original broadcast live on TV - it was glaringly obvious the whole thing was designed for maximum publicity in the hope of people coming forward with information. It pretty much implied he was guilty and challenged him to clear his name. That's not the way criminal justice works in UK.
Wouldn't be surprised if he wins £millions in an out of court settlement and gives the whole lot to charidy - with suitable publicity in the meeja.
BBC * Plod = Disaster squared.
I happened to see the original broadcast live on TV - it was glaringly obvious the whole thing was designed for maximum publicity in the hope of people coming forward with information. It pretty much implied he was guilty and challenged him to clear his name. That's not the way criminal justice works in UK.
Wouldn't be surprised if he wins £millions in an out of court settlement and gives the whole lot to charidy - with suitable publicity in the meeja.
La Liga said:
Claudia Skies said:
it was glaringly obvious the whole thing was designed for maximum publicity in the hope of people coming forward with information.
Yet not so glaringly obvious to the person who investigated the matter. Mermaid said:
The obvious stuff in Rotherham, Oxford etc - blind eye.
So presumably you wouldn't be concerned if they rolled around to your house with the same approach - helicopter, police cars, prime time news coverage of the search. See if you can explain that to your neighbours, in-laws, friends, customers....Mermaid said:
La Liga said:
Claudia Skies said:
it was glaringly obvious the whole thing was designed for maximum publicity in the hope of people coming forward with information.
Yet not so glaringly obvious to the person who investigated the matter. Have you read the report?
The investigation is being significantly expanded...
Inept raid on a multi-millionaires property given prime airtime.
Paedo kit not found. I doubt that anything else found.
Someone else then reports a crime by aforementioned multi-millionaire...
No s
t Sherlock.
BBC news report this. Desperate to justify their disgraceful behaviour before, I suspect.
Significant increase in allegations?
I'm surprised hundreds haven't jumped on the bandwagon! (yet)
Inept raid on a multi-millionaires property given prime airtime.
Paedo kit not found. I doubt that anything else found.
Someone else then reports a crime by aforementioned multi-millionaire...
No s
t Sherlock.BBC news report this. Desperate to justify their disgraceful behaviour before, I suspect.
Significant increase in allegations?
I'm surprised hundreds haven't jumped on the bandwagon! (yet)
Lin Homer gets let of off the hook by an interrogator of the same political colour and cites 'bad data'?
They must have some concrete evidence on Sir Cliff given the store Homer puts in 'bad data' for not tackling tax evaders.
Perhaps Sir Cliff also has homes in Westminster and Rotherham?
They must have some concrete evidence on Sir Cliff given the store Homer puts in 'bad data' for not tackling tax evaders.
Perhaps Sir Cliff also has homes in Westminster and Rotherham?
All a bit DLT now. Without deciding his guilt or otherwise the initial investigation clearly hit the buffers, but just keep on going and eventually you might get some more evidence that they can make stick.
It does seem vindictive as they made themselves look dimwits they way they did things before.
I hope they end it one way or another sooner rather than later.
It does seem vindictive as they made themselves look dimwits they way they did things before.
I hope they end it one way or another sooner rather than later.
spaximus said:
All a bit DLT now.
Found guilty by a jury? spaximus said:
Without deciding his guilt or otherwise the initial investigation clearly hit the buffers, but just keep on going and eventually you might get some more evidence that they can make stick.
Clearly hit the buffers? I need not point out you have no idea of the allegations and development of the investigation. If the police ignore multiple allegations then it'd be the case of "you'll get away with it if you're a celebrity" etc etc.
The approach of some on here:
La Liga said:
learly hit the buffers? I need not point out you have no idea of the allegations and development of the investigation.
If the police ignore multiple allegations then it'd be the case of "you'll get away with it if you're a celebrity" etc etc.
The approach of some on here:
Indeed we have no idea of the allegations or their development. So why is this on the BBC news? If the police ignore multiple allegations then it'd be the case of "you'll get away with it if you're a celebrity" etc etc.
The approach of some on here:
All rather sad. As are your pathetic aspersions.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff