Sir Cliff Richard
Discussion
The Hypno-Toad said:
a lot of people on here (including myself) have called for the BBC to properly investigated for its impartiality and links to other outside organisations which might have a common purpose with others. This would be the perfect reason to start that.
Would that be "common purpose" or "Common Purpose"?Thorodin said:
No, I think they did not. The only evidence they had was the testimony of the accuser, that being a lowered threshold to get a conviction. That's my point about this, it's a different standard of 'proof' to satisfy public alarm at the perceived reluctance originally to take seriously a complaint - leading to the real victims' silence.
"The best defence teams possible?" Again, not the point! The best defence teams in the world have tied hands trying to prove a negative!
I understand your point of view in such matters and believe the mind set is prevalent throughout the legal profession. That's why it won't change and why Justice is indeed blind - for different reasons.
You won't change my mind because you don't know how courts work. The matter needs proving beyond reasonable doubt. The threshold isn't lowered at a criminal trial. "The best defence teams possible?" Again, not the point! The best defence teams in the world have tied hands trying to prove a negative!
I understand your point of view in such matters and believe the mind set is prevalent throughout the legal profession. That's why it won't change and why Justice is indeed blind - for different reasons.
You have also not seen all the evidence so cannot say 'All they had'.
My thoughts exactly.
The BBC come across as desperate not to be the first having found out about the matter and SYP too concerned about wanting to keep the warrant secret by working with the BBC.
The Hypno-Toad said:
Having gone through this thread, I would very strongly suggest that Sir Cliff has the BBC and SYP bang to rights.
I'd be surprised if he doesn't get a payout. It looks like poor work from both organisations. The BBC come across as desperate not to be the first having found out about the matter and SYP too concerned about wanting to keep the warrant secret by working with the BBC.
La Liga said:
ou won't change my mind because you don't know how courts work. The matter needs proving beyond reasonable doubt. The threshold isn't lowered at a criminal trial.
You have also not seen all the evidence so cannot say 'All they had'.
Holy Revival! Back to July! OK, I'll expand. I'm not trying to change your mind, you will always defer to your occupational compulsion no matter what whereas luckily I am totally independent. To say I don't know how courts work is presumptive and, being so open to rebuttal, foolish to invite challenge. But my arguments are not directed at you, they are not personal so personal assumptions are irrelevant.You have also not seen all the evidence so cannot say 'All they had'.
If there was any actual evidence other than the highly subjective account of one alleged victim after such a long time, balanced against the denial by the accused, there would be some mention of it either in public record or noted as in camera. To me, that is a lowered threshold of evidence to be taken as 'proof'. Further, the judge's direction to a jury that the alleged victim's testimony is sufficient proof, in my view, doesn't get anywhere near a sufficient level of proof. As ever, my view is of no consequence in law and the legal profession will not challenge a golden goose. I'll iterate my view once more for clarity: evidence that would produce a conviction on this level of 'proof' is, or should be, inadequate to pronounce someone guilty. On the other hand I obviously realise the argument has been lost!
I think the BBC have lost their way. I think SYP have acted badly by clearly tipping off the BBC.
Its like both organisations don't give a s
te and have no moral compas for having it announced live he is under investigation and here is a live feed of the raid on his house. WTF !
Its not a fekking game. The BBC seem so smug with it all. Again its not a game it has serious consequences for the rest of the that persons life.
I think its the last straw tbh with the BBC - I think they should lose their charter. Heads should roll in SYP for tipping off a raid so it could be broadcast live. I'm appalled by both of their actions.
I think its also time for the law to give anonymity for the 'accused' until charged.
Its like both organisations don't give a s
te and have no moral compas for having it announced live he is under investigation and here is a live feed of the raid on his house. WTF ! Its not a fekking game. The BBC seem so smug with it all. Again its not a game it has serious consequences for the rest of the that persons life.
I think its the last straw tbh with the BBC - I think they should lose their charter. Heads should roll in SYP for tipping off a raid so it could be broadcast live. I'm appalled by both of their actions.
I think its also time for the law to give anonymity for the 'accused' until charged.
Edited by superlightr on Wednesday 26th October 17:16
Well said, both organisations need a roasting for this, and in public so those at fault get to feel the heat of what Cliff has been through. Im no fan of his but having your name dragged through the dirt like this and by a public service broadcaster at that, not even a red top, is way out of order.
Cupramax said:
Well said, both organisations need a roasting for this, and in public so those at fault get to feel the heat of what Cliff has been through. Im no fan of his but having your name dragged through the dirt like this and by a public service broadcaster at that, not even a red top, is way out of order.
Too quick to make the news rather than report on it...Murph7355 said:
Cupramax said:
Well said, both organisations need a roasting for this, and in public so those at fault get to feel the heat of what Cliff has been through. Im no fan of his but having your name dragged through the dirt like this and by a public service broadcaster at that, not even a red top, is way out of order.
Too quick to make the news rather than report on it...Constables Oath said:
I, .. .. of .. .. do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.
Sir Cliff Richard was subjected to degrading and humiliating treatment and an unusual punishment, conduct that breaches Article Three of the Human Rights Act.
Any contravention of the 1998 Human Rights Act is unlawful.
Someone within South Yorks. Police needs their collar felt at the very least.
Murph7355 said:
Cupramax said:
Well said, both organisations need a roasting for this, and in public so those at fault get to feel the heat of what Cliff has been through. Im no fan of his but having your name dragged through the dirt like this and by a public service broadcaster at that, not even a red top, is way out of order.
Too quick to make the news rather than report on it...Poor show, closing ranks.
Jimboka said:
A lot of people would disagree
'Cliff sold more than 250 million records worldwide.He has total sales of over 21 million singles in the United Kingdom and is the third-top-selling artist in UK Singles Chart history, behind the Beatles and Elvis Presley....'
Maybe, but he's been at it for 100 years and there are some very deluded and easily pleased people in this world of ours...'Cliff sold more than 250 million records worldwide.He has total sales of over 21 million singles in the United Kingdom and is the third-top-selling artist in UK Singles Chart history, behind the Beatles and Elvis Presley....'
mybrainhurts said:
Jimboka said:
A lot of people would disagree
'Cliff sold more than 250 million records worldwide.He has total sales of over 21 million singles in the United Kingdom and is the third-top-selling artist in UK Singles Chart history, behind the Beatles and Elvis Presley....'
Maybe, but he's been at it for 100 years and there are some very deluded and easily pleased people in this world of ours...'Cliff sold more than 250 million records worldwide.He has total sales of over 21 million singles in the United Kingdom and is the third-top-selling artist in UK Singles Chart history, behind the Beatles and Elvis Presley....'
Witness the popularity of Country and Western.
I like Cliff's records, always have done, especially the ones from the 1980's.......some of the late 60's ones were a bit naff I suppose.
Wired for sound....great fresh sounding record:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V57eqtN2K7E
If this doesn't get MBH on Roller Skates nothing will.....
Wired for sound....great fresh sounding record:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V57eqtN2K7E
If this doesn't get MBH on Roller Skates nothing will.....
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff