Sir Cliff Richard
Discussion
Steffan said:
I can only agree with you. The two crimes are utterly different in their seriousness. This business at Rotherham is genuinely a National disgrace. Comparing this to any other crime is not productive. These crimes were individually desperately serious on every occasion. And there are apparently literally thousands of cases. Quite outside comparison with any other minor crime. Which does not mean that the minor crimes do not matter. But there is a world of difference.
I am not convinced. It's TISOL speed week again isn't it, where European police forces join together to deal with driving that results in so many deaths per annum. Nice idea, keeps people in jobs, the Great and the Good have something do, gets some branding and logos out there. How many years has that TISOL plod united against speeding drivers been running? How many years has TISOL speed week overlapped with the Council and Plod keeping that organised child grooming of vulnerable minors secret? And William VAGUE does say 'If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide'.Cameron wants to make it an offence not report child abuse? Who are we supposed to report it to? Councils? Plod? The NSPCC? Childline? Which organisation would deal with it and which of those will hide it away in a filing cabinet and hope it stays there?
Plod want to make it easier to deal with dangerous driving at the roadside, it cuts down on the paperwork overhead and reduces congestion in the courts, what with the number of courts and access to justice being reduced.
Right so the police that ignore and hide organised sexual exploitation of minors want to be able to deal with dangerous driving at the side of the road like dealing with a blown bulb or issuing a VDRS or Section 59? Yeah, right!
TISOL, lets reduce death on the Roads? THINK! No different from 'Every Child Matters' is it? Empty platitudes from those that fill their coffers and pension chests without doing the job they're paid to do.
carinaman said:
Proportionality and perspective. How dangerous was you getting carried away with the Buick V8 in your Spen King masterpiece in a 30 limit compared to those within the authorities in Rotherham that failed to do their job? They've just had some chap from the Council on PM he said he was part of the solution rather than the problem and mentioned 'systems'.
In my book sex with minors is more serious than an SP30. 'Victimless crimes'? 'undesirables'? It's a bit like policing by postcode isn't it?
Carinaman, please take this the right way, but I think that you may have what may politely be termed "issues". Why are you obsessed with me getting a speeding fine (cause: being a careless numptie) well over a year ago? It's something about which I give not one toss, but you mention it almost every time you reply to a post from me. In my book sex with minors is more serious than an SP30. 'Victimless crimes'? 'undesirables'? It's a bit like policing by postcode isn't it?
You are also missing my point in response to Digga. He seemed to me to suggest that the Rotherham scandal is somehow in the same ball park as a supposed scandal about speed limits being set too low near some cities. That to me is like someone saying "I had a bad day, I was sexually abused and no one cared" and someone else saying "Hey, I had a bad day too, I got a speeding ticket and no one cared".
Also, no one in the world is suggesting that speeding is treated more seriously than child abuse, except you, and, I'm sorry, but your suggestion on that is plain nuts.
Breadvan72 said:
Carinaman, please take this the right way, but I think that you may have what may politely be termed "issues".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayvyvSYHTm8I am a bit intolerant of the Midnight news that their PCC was working at the Council while this systematic, organised sexual exploitation of minors was happening. It confirms the point I was trying to make that the Great and the Good aren't that much. As the PCC election in West Mids. last week cost £3.7 Million, would that be a price worth paying to get someone that presided over the mass defiling of youngsters out of their cushy little PCC number? Hopefully that'll be another nail in the coffin of PCCs!
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 27th August 00:31
Breadvan72 said:
Digga said:
carinaman said:
So we care about what goes on with ISIS in Syria and Northern Iraq while turning a blind eye when equally barbaric practices are going on in Rotherham? It's like that child soldier stuff in Africa we all get hand wringy about.
We're a nation of deluded PC hypocrites.
It's like the 50mph motorway limits around Sheffield or Brum; they don't affect the nice, middle class, bien pensant politicians and policy makers, so the problems fail to exist. Until, of course, there is a knock-on effect - a backlash, or tipping point.We're a nation of deluded PC hypocrites.
I infer, by the way that 50 mph motorway limits are a peeve for you, but your point seems daft anyway, as setting speed limits is a policy choice. It might very well be a bad one, but it's done on purpose. The Rotherham scandal is all about cowardice, incompetence, people ducking issues, people not caring, you name it; not a formal and public policy about speed limits. Lastly, those who set speed limit policies use roads themselves, so I am not sure how they get to be immune from the effects of their decisions as you suggest they are. There isn't a private helicopter service for all local authority members and officers.
carinaman said:
...The justice system is just another part of Broken Britain.
Broken Britain is a media myth. Parts of Britain are broken. Many parts aren't broken. The justice system is sometimes broken and sometimes not. It is the imperfect product of imperfect human agency.Are you sure that your view of things isn't influenced by your perception that you got a raw deal from some police officers or a court? IIRC something happened that might perhaps have given you grounds for seeking a judicial review of something or other, but you didn't take advice or seek to challenge until the time limit for doing so had long expired (if that is so, that cannot be the fault of the system). Apols if I am getting that wrong.
Breadvan72 said:
I infer, by the way that 50 mph motorway limits are a peeve for you, but your point seems daft anyway, as setting speed limits is a policy choice. It might very well be a bad one, but it's done on purpose. The Rotherham scandal is all about cowardice, incompetence, people ducking issues, people not caring, you name it; not a formal and public policy about speed limits. Lastly, those who set speed limit policies use roads themselves, so I am not sure how they get to be immune from the effects of their decisions as you suggest they are. There isn't a private helicopter service for all local authority members and officers.
I disagree. I think there is a broader problem; that people in power neither know nor care of the effects of their ill-conceived actions or in-actions (read: neglect of duty).IMHO localised motorway speed limits per-se are not the issue, but rather are are merely a symptom, an example of of broader neglect, in this instance of of the transport infrastructure, by those in power.
Bringing the matter back on topic, it is fairly clear that people in office, as well as those in major, state-owned institutions like the BBC [i[must[/i] have had knowledge of Saville's abuse and, if CR is guilty, perhaps of his too, but decided not to act.
Breadvan72, regarding your second paragraph, you're a good chap! Maybe a debrief in the future may be useful. It's ongoing, the back story means I won't let go just yet.
'Broken Britain'? It's a catchy phrase like 'Every Child Matters' isn't it?
That a big cheese at the Council while industrial scale sexual exploitation of minors was going on is now their PCC reminds me of the Who line 'Meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
'Broken Britain'? It's a catchy phrase like 'Every Child Matters' isn't it?
That a big cheese at the Council while industrial scale sexual exploitation of minors was going on is now their PCC reminds me of the Who line 'Meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.
Nor is the fact you can't get rid of a PCC unless they've done something that would have got them a custodial sentence of 2 years or more.
It's like rigging the charts. With or without having a young lad sat beside you in your Rolls Royce as you tour the radio stations mate.
It's like rigging the charts. With or without having a young lad sat beside you in your Rolls Royce as you tour the radio stations mate.
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 27th August 17:34
carinaman said:
Nor is the fact you can't get rid of a PCC unless they've done something that would have got them a custodial sentence of 2 years or more.
Not only is the whole idea of PCC's a crap one, it turns out the legislation has gems like this in it.What is it with highly paid public office posts that always seem to have a clause that you can't sack them, unless it's something like murder (or filming in a cinema!), and even if they get sacked for being incompetent, they end up getting a load of dosh to leave with a full pension!
XCP said:
I wonder how many people voted for him. If people can't be bothered to vote they have little cause for complaint when the person elected turns out to be a muppet.
I found this link:http://bernardrix.com/2014/08/27/if-there-were-to-...
It says on a turnout of just over 145K (14.5%) he got 74615 1st preference votes 51.35%.
Given his achievements with the Council, ahem, was he really qualified to stand? It is like the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy where they send the useless folk like Phone Sanitisers off to another planet. But in the UK with our 'British Values' we allow them to apply for £100K jobs.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff